THE UNIVERSITY 
OF ILLINOIS 
LIBRARY 


SAG 


F2IOf 


Return this book on or before the 
Latest Date stamped below. A 
charge is made on all overdue 
books. 


U. of I. Library 


JAN 31°39 
‘kee Phas 


dub 12 1972. 


ise Uy Tes Sa Dist 
ll ile Yoisif ie 
\u by 
" 
! 


ARR 114 1979 


NOU 2h jgeBAAR 2 811979 
bay) 4 9/1982 


ow wd tg 


ES 16T NOV 1/9 1991: ea 
NOV 19 19 es . 


ve sh! 
eee > 
Oy ie 


I Sore 7 4 


7 sf « 
ae id Oe 


FEUDAL FRANCE 


IN THE 


FRENCH EPIC 


FEUDAL FRANCE 


IN THE 


FRENCH EPIC 


A STUDY OF FEUDAL FRENCH INSTITUTIONS 
IN HISTORY AND POETRY 


BY 
GEORGE BAER FUNDENBURG, PH.D. 
iy 


SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE 
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF 
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE FACULTY OF PHILOSOPHY, 
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 


PRINCETON, N. J. 
1918 


Copyright, 1918 
BY PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS 


Princeton, New Jersey 


AZAD 
FMF 


Approved for publication, on behalf of the Department of 
Romance Lauguages and Literatures of Columbia Umversity. 
Henry ALFRED TOopD. 


New YorkK 
October 1, 1918. 


pro te id fat a 
i tae BA © 


AP 


4 
. 


Les 


a | ' te tA Wes}! 
Che Maes 


TABLE OF CONTENTS 


PAGE 
CHAPTER EG 
intmecucton.  Prench PE pictPoctry.c eer ak aaa saris I 
CHAPTER II 
eeORTADIY Olathe, Neu CalseMicd cs! New esa seine eta I2 
CHAE UE ReLER 
Mrais Or tie: Pendal Baronet. ay csiiaer narrate. PAW) 
CHAPTER TLV, | 
Primitive Phases of the Homme-d-Seigneur Relation in 
Flistory and in) Veudal Prenchy Poetry ou bea 52 
CHAPTER V 
Phases of Feudal Custom in French Epic Poetry........ 78 
CHAPTER VI 
PEICUISIOT Gy ri Asie alCkt samen, Le Ne ls teh eels ROM NAY spe 100 


MRL UOPRE A TLIMES, oer oer ny SNe ate, See Os ae odKy Sencha lesouepalkieiee cate al 114 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


INTRODUCTION 


FrRENcH Epic PoETRY 


At the outset of this study it is desirable to make a definite 
analysis of the meaning of the term French Epic Poetry and 
what part of this corpus is to be styled Feudal Poetry. Ina 
large sense almost all narrative works in verse composed prior 
to the fourteenth century, and dealing even remotely with life 
in France, are known as the French Epic. The designation cov- 
ers a long period of composition, and a wide variety of material 
and treatment. It includes the Chanson de Roland of the 
primitive period, and at the other extreme of age and style the 
Chgés and similar works of Chrétien de Troyes. 

The age of the first production of epic poetry in France has 
long been a question of dispute. Almost as many answers have 
been given as there are scholars in the field. Gaston Paris and 
Gautier have supported the theory of the origin of the epic 
poetry in the cantilénes, i.e., short songs that were first com- 
posed on the field of battle by the warriors, who were also 
poets—these songs at some less remote time being developed 
into the chansons de geste as they are preserved in the manu- 
scripts of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Rajna, Grober, 
and Jordan, have maintained that the chansons are direct con- 
tinuations of ancient chansons composed, in form similar to 
those extant, as early as the sixth and seventh centuries. 
Suchier, Wechssler (also Paul Meyer and Ferdinand Lot), 
have upheld the opinion that the epic material existed in the 
remote Middle Ages in the form of legends upon which were 
based the chansons, less ancient in formation than the legends. 
Finally, Becker (and Jullian) and Bédier, in the last decade 
or two, have attempted to demonstrate that the French epic 
poetry is of comparatively recent origin. 


I 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


The Roland, probably the oldest existing chanson, is appro- 
priately known as the sole example of the National Epic, 
strictly speaking. It is marked throughout by a conception of 
the unity of the territory today known as France, in its 
struggles during the early medieval period, with the other 
great Western European powers, especially Spain. The second 
great distinguishing feature of this poem is the grandeur of 
the Emperor, and the devotion to him, developed to a degree 
not equalled in any other epic poem. Other chansons, such as 
the Couronnement de Louis, show in remarkable exemplifica- 
tion one or other of these two traits,—national unity, or ex- 
altation of the Imperial ideal,—but no other poem shows the 
same magnificent conception of unity, patriotism, and loyalty 
consistently sustained throughout a work of this magnitude. 

On the other hand, the Cligés of Chrétien de Troyes, for 
example, written about 1170, and similar works of the end of 
the twelfth and beginning of the thirteenth century, show the 
epic in the last stages of its progression. The Cligés is one of 
those poems termed Court Epics, by reason of their treatment 
of material of Knighthood and Chivalry, in the style that re- 
sulted (1) from the high development of aristocratic social 
life at the royal court, (2) from the consequent elevation of 
women, and (3) from the influence of audiences that de- 
lighted in fantastic depiction. 

These two representative poems, the Roland and the Clhigés, 
delimit in a general way the extent of the field. But the 
transition from the one type to the other occupied centuries, 
and produced epic poetry displaying modifications at every 
stage in the long intermediary passage. Starting with the Ro- 
land, the purely National Epic, and tracing the slow variation 
through to the latest, most recent form, the Court Epic, vari- 
ous poems are to be found that may be grouped under a few 
large divisions. The first of these, after the National, is the 
Pre-Feudal Epic, a term applied in the present study to a group 
of poems that reflect in their material and treatment the social 
and political life of the period of French history following 
the disruption of the Empire in 843, up to the firm establish- 


2 


FRENCH EPIC POETRY 


ment toward the end of the tenth century of that system of 
government today classed as Feudalism by the historians. In 
this group, the Pre-Feudal Epic, there may be introduced a 
subdivision. The earlier of these poems are distinguished by 
a strong reminiscence of the imperial power of the Carolin- 
gians prior to the territorial division of 843; 1n the later poems 
is to be noted the extreme anarchy that darkened the end of 
the ninth and the beginning of the tenth centuries, when the 
king had been divested of all power, and nascent Feudalism 
had not as yet systematically substituted itself in the place of 
the royal government, which had practically ceased to exist. 
And the same sort of subdivisions, of classes within classes, 
might be made again in this group, and in the classifications to 
follow. There is no real limit to the possible divisions except 
the number of poetic works, for no two poems may be assigned 
with certainty to the same date, and each reflects a different 
stage in the development of society and government. The 
delimitations are therefore broad for the purpose of general 
survey, and minor distinctions are reserved for subsequent 
chapters. 

Following the Pre-Feudal period comes the epoch of the 
completest and most uniform prevalence of the Feudal system. 
And corresponding to this period of time is the Feudal Epic 
proper, represented by poems few in number, but sharply 
distinct from the earlier and later groups. In these poems is 
reflected the swift-moving, constant struggle of the working 
of feudal society. For although the system of Feudalism may 
be accounted established during this period,—viz., the end of 
the tenth to the beginning of the twelfth century—the social 
and political status of the individual was not fixed with any 
degree of permanency; the individual rose or fell in the scale 
of the feudal hierarchy according to the measure of his mani- 
fested strength. And this never-ending strife occupied the 
whole thought of the men of that age, and found rich ex- 
pression in the truly feudal poems, such as the Garin le 
Loherain. 

After Feudalism had held sway for some two centuries of 


3 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


turbulent life, the reaction set in toward a more stabilized 
central government, and as the power of the crown grew and 
the ill-used might of the nobility was held in increasing check, 
there followed naturally in the twelfth century an era of higher 
intellectual, religious, and social development, tending toward 
the comparative serenity of the absolutist age that began to- 
ward the end of the thirteenth century. The strength that had 
been expended at home in the struggles of nascent Feudalism 
was diverted into the Crusades. Immediately the change was 
reflected in the poetry. Less impressed by local events, with a 
wider vision of the relation of France to the remainder of 
Western Europe, the people turned eagerly to the tales of 
romanesque adventure outside their own country, in Italy 
especially, from which returning warriors and _ pilgrims 
brought back stories of foreign interest. This new view—half- 
vision, half-knowledge—of the outside world stimulated a re- 
vival of the old chansons, and caused in their style and material 
a change from the realistic presentation of the turmoil familiar 
in early feudal life to a fanciful narrative of travel and ro- 
mance beyond the borders of France. This style of chanson 
has been designated by the class-name roman d’aventure, 
Even in these poems, fantastic as they are, there is of necessity 
a reflection of feudal conditions now fully established, and, 
for that reason, of less prominence in the eyes of the people 
and also less important because of the increasing authority of 
the king. So these poems, the romans d’aventure, are fre- 
quently referred to in this study as the late feudal poetry. The 
feudal element is still largely in evidence though shadowed by ~ 
the imaginative treatment common to this age. 

The transition from the late feudal poetry, or romans 
d@aventure, to the court epic, or romance of chivalry, came 
about near the end of the thirteenth century as a natural result 
of the more refined court life, the influence of the Christian 
element of Chivalry, the consequent worship of women, and 
the quest of glory for glory’s sake. 

Thus far have been briefly traced the gradually changing 
social conditions of France from the ninth to the thirteenth 


4 


FRENCH EPIC POETRY 


century, from the National or Royal period through the sub- 
sequent anarchy to the establishment of the feudal system, then 
through the gradual decay, or lessening importance, of the 
feudal régime to a second royal or absolutist age. And, cor- 
responding to the shifting state of society during these cen- 
turies, the poetry has been grouped in sequence from the 
National to the Pre-Feudal, the Feudal proper, the late Feudal 
or roman d’aventure, up to the Court Epic or Romance of 
Chivalry. 

Now in this fashion of grouping there is the implication of 
the method that is used throughout the present study; and a 
few words are needed to explain and justify the process that 
is to be employed. In the first place, prior to the last decade 
of the nineteenth century, the only method, save that of 
imaginative speculation, of approaching the study of the French 
epic poems and the age of their composition, has followed one 
general line: the paralleling of historical events with supposed 
versions of the same events recounted in the poetry. This style 
of investigation has yielded much of value, as employed, for 
instance, by Rajna in his Origini dell’ epopea francese. It has, 
however, two flaws that vitiate any conclusions: the first is 
that the supposititious identification of incidents from the 
poetry with historical events, is most often secured through the 
manipulating of details and the employment to a large degree 
of the elements of faith and imagination. Secondly, granted 
the correctness of the parallel, there has been proved nothing 
except that the poem in question, or at any rate the historical 
element of it, is more recent than the actual event. How much 
more recent can only be inaccurately and unsatisfactorily 
inferred. 

Another method has been employed of late years. P. A. 
_ Becker and C.-Jullian, both writing in the last decade of the 
nineteenth century, suggested, more or less incidentally, the 
connection of a single institution of a single century, viz., the 
Pilgrimages in the twelfth century—as the cause of the origin 
of a part of the epic poetry. The process is correct as far 
as it is carried. That is, a social institution in the twelfth cen- 


5 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


tury is seen reflected to a certain degree in some of the late 
feudal poetry. It is known that the institution did not exist 
prior to the century named, and the conclusion follows that the 
depiction of it in the poetry could have been introduced only 
by a poet of the twelfth century, or possibly of the early 
thirteenth. The result of this method is undeniable as far as 
it was carried by Becker and Jullian. Since their works, 
Bédier has produced his Légendes épiques, in which the same 
method is employed—in fact the idea of the importance of the 
pilgrimages has been developed at greater length. 

The limitation of the view of these three scholars to a single 
phase of medieval life has of course given results equally lim- 
ited. The fact that a single institution of the twelfth century 
is reflected in the poetry does not demonstrate that all custom- 
material in the poetry is of the same century. Nor does it fol- 
low, because some elements of some poems belong to the 
twelfth century, that all elements of all poems belong to the 
same period. The method, however, is valid except for its 
limitations. And it has been employed in the present study. 
For if the identity of a custom in poetry and history proves 
only the age of that element, it is possible to ascertain the age 
of the poetry as a whole by seeking out the prevalence in his- 
tory of a number of customs and institutions depicted in te 
poetry. If there be chosen a dozen different phases of the life 
of several centuries which are identical in history and poetry, 
these elements of the poetry may be dated with certainty. Or 
in other words: if in the various poems, or in the same poem, 
elements of social life, manners, customs, political and geo- - 
graphical details, can be fixed definitely in any centuries or 
century; if these customs can be determined as to-their pre- 
valence, then the poems may be assigned without the possibil- 
ity of contradiction to the period indicated and delimited by 
the manners, customs, politics, etc. 

There is one superficial objection to be met: perhaps the 
poet of the twelfth century might have been intimately ac- 
quainted with the manners and customs of the ninth century. 
A social custom or political conception could not have come 


6 


FRENCH EPIC POETRY 


down by word of mouth, through so long a period of time, 
unless in a more or less fixed legendary form. But suppose 
that this poet has at his command all the documents that are 
accessible to students at the present day; suppose he had even 
more documentary evidence which has since been lost—supposi- 
tions absurd, but they will be advanced or intimated—suppose 
this twelfth-century scholar had had all this material at hand 
and had utilized it. Then consider whether many people of his 
epoch would understand and appreciate his work. How much 
popularity would such a work enjoy, filled with antique relics 
dug out of Latin chronicles hundreds of years old? How 
would this scholar and poet educate his audience, unlettered, 
untutored warriors and tradesmen? Every introduction of an 
institution or custom that was not actually prevalent at the 
time of the first composition and recitation would be detri- 
mental to any clearness or intelligibility. It is logically and ob- 
viously necessary therefore to believe that any element found 
in the poetry was introduced at a time when that element was 
familiar to the common people—when the custom involved was 
in vogue. Consequently the poetry may be dated with absolute 
certainty by the adequate dating of all the elements in it 
pertaining to manners, customs, institutions, politics, geography. 

As a result of these considerations the purpose of the present 
study is to determine to what extent the various poems may 
be assigned to definite ages by means of a comparative analysis 
of social conditions in the body of the poetry, and in the his- 
torical documents from the’ sixth to the twelfth century in 
France. It has not been possible in an investigation limited 
in scope as this must be, to consider the whole body of the 
French epic poetry, nor even for that matter each one of the 
poems included in the period of time covered by the research. 
A discrimination has been made consciously, and upon a clear- 
ly defined basis. Since this study has been based entirely on 
the direct reflection of social life in the poetry, those poems 
have been selected which are most detailed in the presentation 
of every phase of man’s activity during the period of time 
indicated. As has been emphasized in another connection, the 


7 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


poems which display most intimate contact with the environ- 
ment of their composer are those purely feudal in nature. The 
cycle of the Loherains, for example, dating from the eleventh 
century, is rich in the details of every aspect of feudalism; 
on the other hand it contains none of the extremely exag- 
gerated and romanesque elements of the later poems, such as 
the Amis et Amiles, a chanson of the twefth century. These 
distinctly feudal poems have here been assigned to the tenth 
and eleventh centuries. In addition to the few specimens of 
unusually faithful portrayal, a number have been included that 
show most evidently elements of an epoch prior to the full 
development of feudalism; and still others subsequent in com- 
position to the height of the feudal régime. Accordingly a close 
study of some score of poems has been made, with greatest 
emphasis, as has been indicated, upon those that are most 
reliable in their depiction of the manners, customs, and so 
forth, of any given period, from the ninth to the twelfth cen- 
tury. In addition, a survey has been made of others, such as 
the Amis et Amiles, which have been deemed too far removed 
from actual life to be accorded any weight of evidence in such 
an investigation. As has been said, this score of poems has 
beeen chosen after careful consideration. It is quite possible 
that the identical list would not be chosen by other students 
of the same field. It may be stated certainly however that no 
scholar would question the value of the group as a whole for 
the purpose of the study of French social institutions in the 
period they represent. 

Apropos of the selection made, a comparison of a similar 
group chosen by Bédier for his Légendes épiques is pertinent. 
It has been mentioned that Bédier approached the question of 
the age of the poetry from the viewpoint of a social institution: 
the difference is that this study is from several points of view. 
Bédier has utilized, however, practically all the poems chosen 
for this investigation, and certain others in addition. In - 
Bédier’s work the choice of chansons upon which particular 
stress is laid was imposed first of all by the necessity of treat- 
ing poems that do not contain any elements apparently ante- 


8 


FRENCH EPIC POETRY 


dating the twelfth century, and secondly that display as evi- 
dently as possible the influence of a single institution, the 
pilgrimages. 

The choice for this study has not been so limited. It is to 
be noted that the poems most accurate in all details are those 
which lend greatest support to this study, whereas in the 
Légendes épiques, the chief reliance is on the roman d’aventure 
type of production, less trustworthy as a source of custom- 
material. The poem of Garin le Loherain, for instance, is 
above all others of the chansons de geste a true portrayal of 
feudal conditions. On the other hand the Amis et Amiles is 
one of those least reliable in its representation of the period 
of composition. Consequently no support is derived in this 
study from the Amis et Amiles, while due attention is paid to 
the Garin. On the contrary, in Bédier’s work, the Amis et 
Amules and other poems of the sort are a chief basis, and the 
Garin is dismissed as being of value only to the student of 
geography—more accurately, it might be said, to the student of 
actual social conditions. 

The first chansons de geste read by the writer were Raoul 
de Cambrai, and Auberi le Bourgoing. The apparent clear- 
ness of the depiction of early feudal conditions in these 
chansons led to a study of a larger group, considered in their 
relation to the possible period of composition; and the age of 
the institutions in the poetry, also recorded in the chronicles 
and other historical documents, has been accounted evidence 
of the period of the composition of the poetry itself. 

The effort throughout the study has been to approach the 
subject at as many different angles as the scope of the work 
- permitted, so that, the same conclusion being reached in every 
chapter by a different method of attack, the argument might 
gain weight by reason of the cumulative nature of the evidence. 
For from whatever point of view the poems were considered, 
they have been found to offer an identical answer to the ques- 
tion of the date of their composition. The various lines of 
research followed may be summed up briefly: 

This first chapter is an attempt to sketch the field in broad 


9 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


lines, to locate this study with respect to the general subject- 
matter of French epic poetry. The second chapter takes up the 
question of the localization of the poetry, and likewise offers 
evidence of the age of the chansons by means of the identity 
of political conditions in the poems, conditions to be found also 
at one time or another in the recorded history of France. This 
comparison of poetic material with the records of chronicles, 
capitularies and other historical documents of the age, is ap- 
plied throughout the succeeding chapters. 

After the territory involved in the action of the feudal 
poetry has been established, and the considerable coincidence 
of the details of the poetry with historic political conditions 
has been emphasized, the discussion passes to the considera- 
tion of the nature of the feudal nobleman who, during the 
period of time represented by the pure feudal epic, lived in that 
part of France where the poetry originated. Again the identity 
of the conditions existing in history and poetry is discovered, 
indicating the high degree of reliance that is to be placed on 
the poetical works as a source of custom-material, and serving, 
as in the second chapter, to establish the composition of certain 
of the chansons in an early age, and of many others in a more 
recent period. 

The fourth chapter follows the same method, again from a 
different point of attack. In it the history of the development 
of a single institution—the homme-d-seigneur relationship 
without land consideration—is traced from its origin under 
the first Merovingians to its disappearance at the beginning of 
the tenth century. And, with this institution as recorded in 
history as a guide, the respective poems are again assigned to 
definite periods. This dating of the poetry, although reached 
by a process distinct from the methods employed in the pre- 
ceding chapters, tends to confirm the conclusions already in- 
dicated. 

In the fifth chapter other customs, of various centuries, are 
considered in both history and poetry, and the identity of the 
material of the chansons with the customs as recorded in the 
historical documents, serves as further evidence of the validity 


10 


FRENCH EPIC POETRY 


of the conclusions that have been reached with respect to the 
age of the poetry, and its reliability in regard to custom data. 

This study was taken up in the manner outlined, and was 
carried three quarters of the way toward its logical conclusion 
before the theories of the various scholars in the field were 
considered. The study is therefore in the nature of a research 
conducted for its own sake and without parti pris, and conse- 
quently the bearing of the work upon the field in general and 
upon the hypothesis of Bédier in particular, has been reserved 
for the sixth and concluding chapter. 


II 


CHAPTER II 


GEOGRAPHY OF THE FEUDAL EPIC 


I 

The geographical element in the feudal French epic com- 
prises three related phases: first, the territorial extent of 
France during the periods in which the various poems were 
composed; second, the sphere of the political influence of 
France beyond the limits of the district actually subject to the 
French king; third, the probable locality in which poetry was 
composed. Each one of these three points has been separately 
discussed by others prior to this time. The geographical extent 
of France with reference to a small group of poems, especially 
the Roland, has been treated in a most able fashion by Gautier 
in his article L’Idée politique dans les chansons de geste, al- 
though in this essay Gautier lays particular emphasis upon the 
idea of French nationality in the epic poetry.t Gautier’s chief 
contention is that in the Roland the word France is applied to 
the territory known as France in modern times. The contrary 
view is sustained by C. T. Hoefft in his work France, Frances, 
und Franc im Rolandsliede.2 The extent of France in the more 
remote Middle Ages, or more particularly, the geographical 
value of the words Francia and Francus, has been discussed 
by G. Kurth in a study entitled La France et les Francs dans 
la langue politique du moyen Gge.* The political relation of 
France to neighboring countries is well analysed by Fournier 
in his massive work Le Royaume d’Arles et de Vienne.* And 
finally, the discussion as to the locality in which the poetry was 


1 Revue des questions historiques, Paris, 1869, vol. VII, pp. 79 ff. 
2 Strassburg, 1891. 

~ 8 Revue des questions historiques, LVII, 337 ff. 
4\Paris, 1801. 


I2 


a a a i a i = 


a 


te 


GEOGRAPHY OF THE FEUDAL EPIC 


probably composed finds an important place in Rajna’s Le 
Origint dell’ epopea francese.® 

The article of Gautier is concerned chiefly with the con- 
sciousness of nationality on the part.of the poets; Kurth and 
Hoefft are interested in the question of terminology rather 
than in the political status of the territory today known as 
France. The work of Fournier is purely historical and political. 
That of Rajna more nearly approaches the field proposed for 
this study. This scholar’s conclusions, however, are based upon 
the general corpus of the French epic, and are drawn in broad 
lines. It is intended here to consider only the feudal epic, 
and to analyse it somewhat closely from the point of view of 
geographical content and French political history, in order to 
reveal from these angles what evidence the poetry contains 
within itself of the original locality of its composition. 

In a discussion of the geography of the French feudal epic, 
a distinction is to be made between the three classes of French 
epic poetry. The National epic may be practically limited to the 
Chanson de Roland, in which there is no accurate and detailed 
evidence of geographical knowledge or interest in details of the 
sort. The poet in the Roland distinguishes in a general way 
larger divisions, such as France and Spain, but he does not con- 
cern himself with more local and minute items of geography. 
Likewise little emphasis is placed on the correctness of place- 
names in the romans d’aventure, as for instance, the second half 
of the Raoul de Cambrai, or the greater part of the Hervis de 
Metz, or the Guy de Bourgogne, etc. But the impression of 
inaccuracy gained from such poems is not to be applied to the 
feudal, or provincial, epic. For it is noteworthy that the more 
feudal a poem is in spirit, the more accurate are the geograph- 
ical details. So in the Garin le Loherain, and the first half of 
the Raoul de Cambrai, which attain the highest degree of true 
feudal representation, the poet displays a fairly accurate 
knowledge of the districts involved in the action of the poem. 
This higher accuracy and more detailed style of the feudal or 
provincial poetry as compared with the National epic and the 


5 Firenze, 1884, pp. 520-542. 
13 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


romans d’aventure, is the natural result of the subject-material. 
The National epic covers areas so large that the poet could 
not be expected to be intimately acquainted with the whole field ; 
the accuracy of the romans d’aventure suffers from the same 
largeness of the field of action, and in addition, by reason of 
their fantastic nature, they are less dependent upon the cor- 
rectness of details of locality. On the other hand, the poet in 
the Feudal epic bases his narration directly upon the life of 
the period, and deals with a comparatively restricted area in the 
individual poem. 


II 

Under Charlemagne (768-814) and Louis I (814-840), there 
was no sharp delimitation of continental Western Europe like 
that of the three great present-day states of France, Germany, 
and Italy. The Roman Empire was a political entity, and what- 
ever subdivisions existed were of an administrative nature. But 
even at this time there was a distinct consciousness of race 
individuality among the several nations ruled by Charlemagne 
and his son Louis.* This sense of difference was not national- 
ism, involving the political limits of the State, but was rather 
the separation caused by physical barriers, aided by variance 
of language and custom. Germany, bounded by the Rhine, 
and Italy, isolated from neighboring states by the Alps and the 
Rhone, were geographically separate from France. 

Recognition of this three-fold character of the Empire is 
found in a royal decree of the year 806 to the effect that a 
man might commend himself as a vassal to whom he would, 
“inter haec tria regna.”’? 

This inherent racial cleavage appeared in the first definitive 
division of the Empire, in 843, under Charles le Chauve. In 
that year, by the treaty of Verdun, France was established 
as all that territory west of the Meuse, the Sadne, and the 
Rhone. Between the Rhine, Meuse, Sadne, Rhone, was the 
kingdom of Lothaire, receiving its name of Lorraine (Lothar- 


6K. A. Freeman, Historical Geography of Europe, Text, I, 134 ff. 
7 Baluzius, a. 806, I, col. 443, sec. 10. 


14 


GEOGRAPHY OF THE FEUDAL EPIC 


ingia) from Lothaire II (855-869). lLothaire’s kingdom in- 
cluded also the city of Lyons, and all Italy. Beyond the 
Rhine, and including the cities of Mainz, Worms, and Speyer, 
was the kingdom of Germany.® 

However, in the kingdom of France so constituted under 
Charles le Chauve, Aquitania, Septimania and Brittany were 
practically independent. 

A distinction should be made at this point between the two 
uses of the term France, in this and later epochs. At the 
period of the first division in the ninth century, France in- 
cluded all the territory delimited above, viz., that part of the 
Empire which was not included in Italy and its dependency 
Lorraine, and Germany. But a second use of the word came 
into existence, and is a cause of much confusion in the study 
of the political and geographical history of France. Besides 
the first and larger application, France denoted the territory 
ruled over by the king of France. Now, under Charles le 
Chauve, these two terms were nearly synonymous; Charles 
governed the greater part of the domain conceded to him by 
the treaty of Verdun, and had at least a nominal right to the 
remainder. But under succeeding rulers, the power of the 
French crown became more and more restricted, until it was 
limited to the Ile-de-France and immediately adjoining terri- 
tory. And as soon as this was true, the word France in any 
text of the period could denote strictly the limited region di- 
rectly subject to the king, or it might retain the earlier and 
broader meaning that it possessed at the time of Charles le 
Chauve. Both of these uses are common in French feudal 
poetry, but frequently in a context so vague that it is impossi- 
ble to determine -which interpretation is to be given in any 
particular instance.® 


Tit 
In the first half or possibly first three quarters of the ninth 
8 Cf. A. Longnon, Atlas historique, Paris, 1912, planche VI, carte for 


843; cf. also Texte explicatif des planches, planche VI. 
®For a more detailed discussion of the use of the term France, cf. 


Hoefft, and Kurth, supra. Also Gautier, L’idée politique, p. 84, note 3. 
15 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


century, there are two poems that should be cited for their 
geographical and political relation to the epoch. The first of 
these is the Floovant. In a subsequent chapter of this study 
the age of the poem is discussed in detail; it is sufficient here 
to say that it has been authoritatively connected with historical 
events as early as the age of the Merovingians.’® In the 
Floovant, the palace of the king is given at one time as at Laon 
and at another as in Paris. The naming of these two places as 
capitals of the kingdom would imply, of course, that the com- 
position of the poem was subsequent to the division of the 
Empire in 843. The fact is not in itself conclusive, but there 
is further evidence in other incidents in the narrative. Floovant 
is exiled from France, and leaves that realm for the Ardennes, 
fighting on the banks of the Rhine, and serving a king whose 
capital is at Beaufort (now Belfort in the Upper Rhine coun- 
try). Returning to France through Bourgogne, Floovant is 
crowned at Reims. Such a story involves a France under the 
rule of a king who does not include the Ardennes nor Bour- 
gogne within his domains, and so could not be prior to the 
division of 843.11. Other considerations, discussed later on, 
indicate a very early origin, so that the original poem may be 
assigned to the middle of the ninth century. 

The poem of the Couronnement de Louts in its earliest form 
is also of the same period. This work, composed of not less 
than five distinct parts, is related to events of the last half 
of the ninth century, and would seem to have originated near 
the time of the historical events with which it deals. The 
action is largely at Aix-la-Chapelle, Laon, and Paris. Accord- 
ing to Gaston Paris, the mention of Aix-la-Chapelle is prob- 
ably a reminiscence of the age when Charlemagne and his son 
Louis held this place in high favor and made it virtually the 
capital of the Empire.?? The mention of Aix-la-Chapelle as one 

10 Cf, Rajna, Origini, VI, 131 ff.; cf. also infra, chapters IV and V. 

11 The treatment of the age of Floovant in this chapter is based 
wholly upon the geographical and political content of the poem. It 
does not imply that a part of the narrative may not be based upon 
traditions of earlier origin. Cf. Rajna, Origin, 146-7. 


12 Histoire poétique, 367 ff. ‘Cf. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the 
Roman Empire, ed. Bury, London, 1900, V, 273 note, and VII, 311. 


16 


GEOGRAPHY OF THE FEUDAL EPIC 


of the capital cities of the king of France occurs in other poems 
of much later composition, but in them the memory is not of 
the actual fact, but is merely a repetition from the earlier 
poems, such as the Couronnement de Lous, and possibly the 
Roland. That the Couronnement was not composed earlier 
than the last half of the ninth century is shown by the historical 
events of that period mentioned in the poem.1? That it was 
not very much later is indicated by the considerations presented 
in the fourth chapter of this study. 

Another poem of the same period, or perhaps earlier, has 
come down in such altered form that it is difficult to establish 
closely the date of its composition, although it is at any rate 
not later than the Couronnement. This poem is the Beuves 
ad’ Aigremont, which is incorporated as the first episode of the 
Quatre Fils Aymon. The connection with the main poem is 
entirely artificial, and although the language is modernized, 
and the origin obscured in the attempt to connect it with the 
later poem, the wide differences in manners and customs show 
valid traces of the antiquity of the Beuves.** The fragment is 
a reminiscence of the age of imperial power when the extent 
of the jurisdiction of the Emperor was limited only by his 
ability to enforce his will on his rebellious vassals. Aigremont, 
the home of the baron whose death is related in the poem, is 
not on the map. The general location is indicated by internal 
evidence. In travelling from Aigremont to Troyes, Beuves 
passes through Lombardy ; and on another occasion, going 
from Aigremont towards Paris, he passes through Bourgogne, 
and is slain there.1* From this it would appear that Aigre- 
mont was in Lombardy. So Beuves would be under the au- 
thority of the king of France only if that king were also king 
of Italy. Such a political status reflected in the poem indicates 
‘that the tradition harks back to the age of the Empire of 
Charlemagne, or of Louis I. 

Also in this same period is the Gormund et Isembard. The 

13 Cf, infra, chapter IV. 

14,\Cf. Quatre Fils Aymon, pp. 40-43. 


15 Tbid., v. 1094. 
16 [bid., vv. 1485-97. 


17 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


action of this poem centers at Ponthieu, and Saint-Riquier. 
Ponthieu, an ancient division of France, in the present-day 
département of the Somme, was under the authority of the 
French king to a greater or less degree, at least until the ac- 
cession of Charles le Gros in 884. In the existing fragment of 
the poem the king is represented as taking a considerable part 
in the action, as might be expected from the proximity of the 
scene to the seat of the royal power. 


IV 


Near the end of his reign, in 870, Charles le Chauve divided 
Lorraine and Bourgogne with Louis le Germanique. To 
France fell the western districts between the Meuse and the 
Scheldt, and the counties of Lyon and Vienne. To Germany 
went eastern Lorraine, together with transjuran Bourgogne. 
But France thus enlarged was not to maintain its unity.7 In 
879, at the death of Louis le Bégue, his two sons divided the 
kingdom between them, Louis III ruling in the north of France, 
Carloman in Aquitania and Bourgogne. And in 880, Boson, 
brother-in-law of Charles le Chauve, usurped Bourgogne and 
Provence, forming a state which, after varying fortunes, es- 
tablished itself as the kingdom of Bourgogne, coming to be 
known towards the end of the twelfth century as the kingdom 
of Arles, from the name of its capital city. This kingdom was 
ruled by independent sovereigns until the year 1032, when at 
the death of the last sovereign, Rudolph III, it passed by be- 
quest of Rudolph to the Emperor Conrad II. A nominal Ger- 
man domination continued until 1246, when Provence passed 
by marriage to the House of Anjou.*® 

Under Charles le Gros (884-888) and Eudes (888-898) the 
parts of the kingdom divided by preceding rulers were united 
again, but neither king had more than nominal authority south 
of the Loire. During the reign of Charles III, le Simple (898- | 


17 Cf. Longnon, Atlas and Texte, carte for 870. 

18 [bid., carte for 880. The subject is treated at length in P. Fournier, 
a Royaume d’Arles et de Vienne, Paris, 1891, especially the first two 
volumes. t 


18 


GEOGRAPHY OF THE FEUDAL EPIC 


922), Normandy was lost—a loss the extent of which was in- 
creased by reason of the weakness of succeeding kings.?® 
Not until 1204, at the time of Philip II, was Normandy given 
back to France. In 1108, at the death of Philip I, the immedi- 
ate dominion of the king of France was limited to Paris, 
Melun, Etampes, Orléans, Sens; i.e., the modern départements 
of the Seine, Seine-et-Oise, Seine-et-Marne, and Loiret. Be- 
yond this the king exercised a certain nominal authority, which 
grew less as it extended from the Ile-de-France. 


V 

To this period of extreme central weakness, which prevailed 
from the accession of Charles III in 898 to the reign of 
Hugues Capet in 987, are to be assigned the poems of Raoul 
de Cambrat, and Auberi le Bourgoing. The primitive nature of 
the warriors whose deeds are related in these narratives com- 
pares well with the Beuves d’Aigremont. These two poems of 
the tenth century, however, are marked with the traces of 
early feudalism. Both reflect the anarchy of the epoch between 
the collapse of the royal power and the complete establishment 
of the feudal system. 

The action of the Raoul is concentrated about Cambrai and 
Saint-Quentin. And in this district the barons are entirely free 
from interference by the king. Politically such was the case 
throughout the tenth and eleventh centuries. In the first part 
of the Raoul the action is connected nominally with the court 
of the king at Paris. But this introduction of the king and his 
court is in the nature of a prologue and accessory basis of the 
action proper, which transpires beyond the sphere of any active 
intervention by the king. So much, at least, is true of the 
primitive part of the Raoul de Cambrai. Nominally, in this 
_ poem, the feudal lords recognize the king’s authority. Actually 
_they are very nearly independent in so far as their conduct 
- does not question his sovereignty. And the picture given by 
the poet is wholly in keeping with the conditions of that age. 

The scene of Aubert le Bourgoing is yet further removed 


19 Cf. Longnon, supra, carte for 912. 
19 ‘ 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


from the influence of the king of France. The action takes 
place largely in the Ardennes, Bourgogne, and the borders of 
Bavaria and Switzerland. Also a minor connection is made 
with Paris and the king, by means of the rather artificial ap- 
peal of the robber Lambert for protection against Auberi; and 
subsequent thereto certain elements of the action have their 
place at or near Paris. 


VI 
The poems of Garin le Loherain, the Mort Garin, and 
Gerbert de Metz, are of the eleventh century. These first 
two chansons, forming a single story, and composed in similar 
style, if not by the same author, are very clear in details of 
geography. The journeys of the warriors to and fro are 
carefully measured, the poet even stating exact distances, as in 
the following passage: 
Ay Anserville. .akenrcunten 
A quatre liues de Mez la grant cité.2° 
The poet’s interest in geographical details is clearly shown 
by the following typical passage: 


Il le trouvérent 4 Bordelle la cit (p. 186). 
Ains que fust vespres a Gironville vint (p. 187). 


Gironville is at the mouth of the Gironde, about fifteen miles 
from Bordeaux. 
Li os Begon de Blaives departit (p. 188). 
Blayes is fifteen miles from Bordeaux, and thirty from 
Gironville. 
Par Grand Mont va, iluec ont messe oi (p. 188). 
Grandmont is on the road from Gascogne to Berry, fifteen 
miles from Limoges. 


A Issoudun en vinrent au dormir (p. 191). 
Issoudun is a town in Berry, fifty-five miles from 


Grandmont. 


Droit vers Bourgogne acueillent lor chemin, 
Tant que ils vinrent 4 Bourbon Lancéis, 
Assez i ot qui es bains se sunt mis (p. 192). 


20 Anserville, now ‘Ancerville-sur-Nied, twelve miles from Metz. 
Garin le Loherain, I, p. 58. 


20 


~GEOGRAPHY OF THE FEUDAL EPIC 


Bourbon |’Ansy is a very small town in Bourgogne, thirty 
miles from Autun, and one and a half miles from the Loire. 
(Ci. Espilly, Dictionnaire de la France, sub voce). 

Droit a Biaugiu firent lor ost venir (p. 193). 

Beaujeu is in the Beaujolais, 18 miles from Macon. 

Sor Belle ville furent li ostel prins (p. 194). 
Belleville, on the Sadne, is 12 miles from Beaujeu. 


Pres de Lions la grant cité de pris, 
D’iluec puet-on les cloches cler oir 
De la cité, qnant on les fait bondir (p. 195) .24 


Thus is seen accurately traced a journey of some 250 miles, 
with nine towns indicated along the route. The passage de- 
monstrates most convincingly the general reliability of the 
feudal epic in matters of geography. 

As a final instance, it may be suggested that the mention, for 
example, of a town as small as Naisil (Naix-aux-Forges), or 
Belin (near Bordeaux), is evidence of an unusually minute 
geographical knowledge for the age in which the poem was 
written. Another such typical reference is to the Pont-Girbert, 
a place so insignificant that only a person familiar with the 
district would be able to cite it.” 

The action is spread over a comparatively large territory, 
but is described with the greatest accuracy in the neighbor- 
hood of Paris, and the district to the north, Picardy. The 
chief centers of action are Paris, Verdun, Metz, Senlis, Cam- 
brai, Saint-Quentin, Amiens, Saint-Omer, Laon, Etampes, 
Bordeaux, and Moriane (Maurienne in Savoie). The king is 
represented as taking a central position in the action—a fact 
consistent with the location of the plot in the north of France, 
in the immediate domains of the king. Northern Bourgogne 
and the Dauphiné, where a part of the action is cast, were at 
this time under the nominal sovereignty of France, but were 
not considered a part of France.?* | 

The chanson of Gerbert de Metz centers approximately at 
the same places as the preceding two poems, though there is 


ee lbid., 1. 
22 [bid.,-I, p. 16. 


_. 23Cf, Longnon, supra, planche XI. 


21 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


less geographical detail in the fragment of the poem that has 
come down. A second minor fragment, dealing with the siege 
of Gerbert at Narbonne, and therefore concerned with a dis- 
trict quite out of the king’s jurisdiction, consistently excludes 
the king from any part in the action.** The king is not usually 
omitted in the feudal poems when the action is made to take 
place within the king’s domains. 


VII 

When Louis VI died, in 1137, his kingdom extended from 
the Somme and the borders of Flanders to the River Adour 
and the ridges of the Pyrenees. Finally in 1204 Philip II 
brought Normandy back to France. Also, during the thir- 
teenth century, the kingdom of Arles was breaking up, and 
was coming back definitively to French control.” 

Beginning with the reign of Louis VI, the feudal poems 


show the increasing domination of the royal power. And from — 
this time on, the geographical location of the action is of small — 


importance, because everywhere in France the power of the > 


king was making itself felt with constantly increasing effect. 
This is to be observed in the poems that follow: the Aye 
d Avignon, of the second quarter of the twelfth century; the 
second part of the Quatre Fils Aymon; the first half of the 


Aiol, about 1160; and the Gérard de Rossillor shortly after; | 


Ogier, Guy de Nanteuil, Guy de Bourgogne, Uvinel, Gaydon, 


in the last quarter of the century; and the second half of the © 
Aiol and the Hervis de Metz, and probably some others, in the ~ 


first decade or two of the thirteenth century. 


‘In addition to the increasing evidence of the king’s authority 


in this last group of poems, there is one other political fact 
worthy of mention by reason of its bearing on the age of the 


5 


Quatre Fils Aymon. The action of a considerable part of this : 


24 Die Befreiung Narbonne’s durch Gerbert de Més, Stengel (Zeit- 
schrift fiir franzésische Sprache und Litteratur, XXIII, IQOI, 271-301). 


25Cf. supra, p. 18 and note. 
22 


chanson is in the neighborhood of Bordeaux. In the year 1154, p 
Henry of Anjou became king of England as Henry II, and 


from that time until 1453 Bordeaux was under English 


GEOGRAPHY OF THE FEUDAL EPIC 


suzerainty.”° The absence of any recognition of the event may 
be considered as negative evidence that the Quatre Fils Aymon 
was composed prior to this time. 


Vill 


Thus far the discussion has been chiefly of the general 
aspects of the geography of the poetry in its relation to the 
political history of the geography of France. The question yet 
to be considered is that of the territory in which the poems 
were composed. Some evidence towards the solution of this 
problem is to be had by a more detailed analysis of the geo- 
graphical centers of action in the various poems. 

In the first place, it is evident that the district involved in 
the action of a poem is properly to be taken into account as 
strong evidence of the place of its composition.2” Two obvious 
reasons point to this: first, the fact that a poet living, say, in 
the Cambrésis, would be interested most naturally in that 
region, and could count most surely upon holding his audience 
with the narration of the deeds of heroes whose lives were 
local traditions of the general Picard district. In the second 
place a Picard poet would not by preference treat of remote 
regions, such as Provence, or Spain, except in a manifestly 
fanciful tale, with no pretense to naming actual places; for the 
difficulties of travel, and the lack of reliable means of inter- 
communication between districts, made it impossible for a man 
to be accurately acquainted with all parts of the country. This 
is especially true of those poems composed in the tenth century 
or earlier, although it is still relatively true of an epoch as late 
as the chansons de Garin in the eleventh century. For the poet 
_ in the Garin, thoroughly conversant as he is with France as a 
whole, shows a preference for and a greater accuracy in the 
district immediately about Paris, and in the region to the north. 

26Cf. Longnon, Atlas, planche XII, carte for 1154. 

27 Cf. P. Paris, Garin, I, xix. Speaking of Jean de Flagy (author of 
at least a part of the Garin), Paris says: “Jean de Flagy était sans 
_ doute né sur les marches de Champagne: . . . Ce qui doit le supposer, 
cest l’exactitude minutieuse avec laquelle il décrit les lieux et les 


édifices, détermine les distances et distingue les nombreuses familles 
féodales de cette partie de la France.” 


23 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


The remainder of this chapter is therefore devoted to a tabula- 
tion of the principal points of action in the poems already 
mentioned. The effort is not to reproduce every place name 
that occurs in the poetry, but to single out only those that are 
deemed of importance in the action of each poem. And for 
the sake of comparison, and because the poems naturally lend 
themselves to such treatment, the discussion is in three divi- 
sions, according to the epoch in which each group of poems 
falls. 


IX 


The first group comprises the six poems composed during 
the ninth and tenth centuries: Floovant, Couronnement de 
Louis, Beuves d’ Aigremont, Gormund et Isembard, Raoul de 
Cambrai, Auberi le Bourgoing. The cities and ‘districts in 
which the action takes place are as follows: 


In the Floovant: Laon (Aisne), Paris (Seine), Ardennes Forest 
(Belgian border), Bank of the Rhine River, Beaufort (Belfort in the 
Upper Rhine country), Chateau Auviliers (in Burgundian territory) ,28 
Bourgogne,?? Saint Remi (at Laon). 

In the Couronnement de Louis: Aix-la-Chapelle,2° Tours (Indre-et- 
Loire), Poitiers (Vienne), Bordeaux (Gironde), Montreuil-sur-mer 
{Montreuil in the Pas-de-Calais), Paris, Laon. 


In the Beuves d’Aigremont: Paris, Aigremont (in Northern Lom- 
bardy), Lombardy, Troyes (Aube), Floridon (in Bourgogne), Bour- 
gogne. 

In the Gormund et Isembard: Ponthieu (Somme), Saint-Riquier 
(Somme, near Abbeville) .31 

In the Raoul de Cambrai: Cambrai (Nord), Origny (Aisne), Saint- 
Quentin (Aisne), Paris. 

In the Auberi le Bourgoing: Paris, Geneva, Ostesin (in the Marche 


28Cf w«anglois, Table des Noms propres de toute nature compris 
dans les chansons de geste, Paris, 1904, sub voce: Langlois says merely 
in France, but at this time the part of France indicated was Bourgogne. 
Cf. supra, p. 18, historical statement for Bourgogne. 

29 Cf. ibid, 

30 In general, territory outside of France is not included in the dis- 
cussion. Exception is made of the districts adjoining France on the 
North and East. 

31 Ponthieu was an ancient division of France, with Abbeville as the 
chief city. 


24 


2 
: 


GEOGRAPHY OF THE FEUDAL EPIC 


de Bourgogne), Ostenne (Bourgogne?), Vienne (on the Rhone, Isére), 
Langres (Haute-Marne), Bavaria, Oridon (in the Ardennes Forest), 
Chateau d’Aufais (between Hainaut and Bavaria), Clarengon (Arden- 
nes Forest?). 


In the first four of the above six poems the geography is 
somewhat impaired, probably by reason of frequent redaction. 
The last two are more precise, especially the Raoul de Cambrai, 
in which the poet consistently shows thorough knowledge of 
the district in which he places the action of the poem. This may 
be explained by the fact that the Raoul de Cambrai and the 
Aubert le Bourgoing, poems of the tenth century, are of later 
composition than the preceding four chansons, and have con- 
sequently suffered less at the hands of redactors, in coming 
down to the period of fixation, the thirteenth century. 

The territory in which the greater part of the action of this 
group of poems centers may be located by a line drawn as 
follows: from Montreuil (Pas-de-Calais) to Paris, then through 
Troyes (Aube) to Vienne (Isére); due east to Northern 
Italy, then North along the western valley of the Rhine to 
Aix-la-Chapelle; southwest to the Ardennes, and northwest 
to Montreuil. Or, to state it in general figures, a parallelogram 
along the eastern border of France from Vienne (fifty miles 
north of Grenoble in the Isére) north to Aix-la-Chapelle, some 
350 miles in length north and south and 120 miles across east 
and west, plus a triangle with base along the longer side of the 
parallelogram, the three corners at Vienne, Montreuil, Ar- 
dennes, respectively. Besides this territory, in the two poems, 
Floovant and the Couronnement de Louis, there is minor 
action to the southwest of Paris. It has already been indi- 


cated, however, that these two poems, for the reason of their 


great age and wide divergence in their present form from what 
was the original, cannot be accorded an equal weight of evi- 
dence with the chansons of the tenth and eleventh centuries. 
Even in the Floovant and the Couronnement, the major part 
of the action takes place in the territory outlined, and only the 
secondary adventures are made to the southwest. So it may be 
said, from the point of view of geographical evidence, that the 


25 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


earliest feudal poetry had its origin in the eastern and northern 
borderlands of France, but especially in the Burgundian dis- 
tricts, and the adjoining part of France. In the second place, 
there is to be noted in all these poems a connection with 
Paris, or with Paris and Laon, as capital of France.*? So the 
poet, living as he may well have done, on the outermost 
borders of the kingdom, nevertheless felt himself a French- 
man by race and preference, though possibly at times under 
foreign domination politically.** 


x 
The second group, composed of poems of the eleventh cen- 
tury, comprises the Garin le Loherain, the Mort Garin, the 
Gerbert de Metz, and the Anseis de Metz.** These four poems 
are parts of a single narrative, and are practically identical 


in territory. The chief course of the action in this group may 


therefore be listed together as follows :*° 

Lyon (on the Rhone, Rhone), Paris, Fossés (Seine-et-Oise), Sens 
(Yonne), Soissons (Aisne), Lagny (Seine-et-Marne), Troyes, Cha- 
lons (Marne), Verdun (Meuse), Metz (Lorraine), Gorze (12 miles 
from Metz, Lorraine), Laon (Aisne), Cambrai, Cologne, Ancerville- 
sur-Nied (12 2miles from Metz, Lorraine), Langres, Moriane (Mauri- 
enne, Savoie),2® Vienne, Valparfonde (12 miles from Chambéry, 
Savoie), Saint-Quentin, Saint-Omer (Pas-de-Calais), Ponthieu, Amiens 
(Somme), Créveceeur (Oise), Dijon (Cdte-d’Or), Chateau-Thierry 
(Aisne), Gironville (Gironde?), Grandmont (near Limoges, Haute- 
Vienne), Neuf-Chatel (near Laon, Aisne), Plesseis (in the Borde- 
lais), Bar-le-duc (Meuse), Naisil (Naix-aux-Forges, near Bar-le-duc, 


32 Except the Gormund et Isembard, which, being fragmentary, cannot 
be definitely called an exception; and this poem, moreover, includes in 
the action a King Louis of France, who of course had a capital at 
Paris or Laon. Cf. G. Paris, Histoire poétique, 367 ff. for a discussion 
of Paris, Laon, and Aix-la-Chapelle, as residences of the king of 
France in the French National Epic poetry. 

33 Cf. Brockstedt, Floovent-Studien, Kiel, 1907, p. 162. 

84 Not edited. Cf. Histoire littéraire, XXII, pp. 633-641. The frag- 
ments published hardly warrant an unqualified judgment. The style 
of the parts available indicates a period several decades later than the 
Garin and the Mort Garin. 

85In Die Befreiung Narbonne’s durch Gerbert de Més, the action 
is at Narbonne (Aude). 

86 Generally the modern names are given, except when the connection 
is not obvious, in which case the ancient name is given first, and the 
modern in parentheses. 


26 


GEOGRAPHY OF THE FEUDAL EPIC 


Meuse), Bordeaux, Orléans (Loiret), Cahors (Lot), Blaye (Gironde), 
Lens (Pas-de-Calais), Blancafort (Blanquefort, Gironde), Valen- 
ciennes (Nord), Senlis (Oise), Saint-Michel (Mont-Saint-Michel, 
Manche), Etampes (Seine-et-Oise), Péronne (Somme), Vausore 
(Aisne), Bar-sur-Aube (Aube), Limoges (Haute-Vienne), Bourges 
(Cher), Berry (ancient district of France, capital city Bourges), Saint- 
Macaire (Gironde), Mousson (Meurthe-et-Moselle), Rethel (Arden- 
nes), Hainaut (province of Belgium), Vermandois (ancient division 
of France, capital city Saint-Quentin). 

In these four poems of the second group, the change in the 
field of action from the first group is to be noted as follows: 
first, there is a concentration of action in Picardy, Champagne, 
and the Ile-de-France, while Eastern France still maintains a 
position of some importance. The second feature is the placing 
of a not inconsiderable part of the action southwest of Paris 
as far as Bordeaux. Whether there is any particular signifi- 
cance in the direction of this extension is not apparent.*” 


XI 


The third group of poems comprises those which were com- 
posed during the twelfth century. In approximate order of 
composition they are: Aye d’Avignon, Quatre Fils Aymon 
(second section), Quatre Fils Aymon (remainder), Aiol, 
Gérard de Rossillon, Ogier, Guy de Nanteuil, Guy de Bour- 
gogne, Otinel, Gaydon, Hervis de Metz. The action is 
centered as follows: 

In the Aye d’Avignon: Laon, Soissons, Avignon (Vaucluse), 
Lorion (?), Graillemont and the Plains of Landemore (South 
France). 

In the Quatre Fils Aymon (second section, from the end of the 
Beuves d’Aigremont episode to the conclusion of the adventures in the 
Ardennes): Ardennes Forest. 

In the Quatre Fils Aymon (remainder): Paris, Bordeaux, Gas- 
cogne, Trémoigne (Dortmund in Westphalia). 

In the Aiol: Bordeaux, Poitiers, Orléans, Bourges, Langres, Lau- 
sanne (Switzerland) ; also in Spain, at Pampelune. 

In the Gérard de Rossillon: Ardennes Forest, Avignon, Rossillon 
(ancient province of France, almost all the département of the 


87. Cf. supra, p. 22. 


27 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


Pyrénées-Orientales), Chatillon (Céte-d’Or), Orléans, Paris, Avalon 
(Yonne), Plains of Valberon (Vaubouton, near Vézelay, Yonne), 
Dijon, Peira Nauza (Pierenause, near the town of Roussillon in the 
Isére) .38 

In the Ogier: Paris, Saint-Omer, Besangon (Doubs), Reims, 
Lausanne, Cambre (near Aoste), Aiiste (Aoste in Piedmont), Losarie 
(at the foot of the Alps, between Besancon and Italy), Laon, Chastel- 
Fort (lower Rhone River), Montchevroel (near Chastel-Fort), Beau- 
vais (Oise), Dijon, Yvorie (Ivrée, in Italy), Saint-Tieri (near Saint- 
Ajosse), Saint-Ajosse (in Italy), Vergiaus (Verceil, in Piedmont). 

In the Guy de Nantewil: Paris, Etampes, Samois (near Fontaine- 
bleau, Seine-et-Marne), Nanteuil (Oise) ; Paris and Nanteuil are most 
important. 

In the Guy de Bourgogne: Paris. (The remainder of the action is in 
Spain.) 

In the Otinel: Paris. (The remainder of the action is in Lombardy.) 

In the Gaydon: Angers (Maine-et-Loire), Orléans, Nobles (in 
Spain), Val de Glaye (in France). Scene chiefly at Angers, which is 
considered outside France. (Cf. p. 327.) | 

In the Hervis de Metz: Metz, Lovaing (Louvain in Belgium), 
Nivelle (in Belgium), Bruxelles, Senlis, Paris, Provins (Seine-et- 
Marne?), Lagny. 

The most evident trait of this twelfth century poetry is the 
apparent lack of attention to geographical details, as compared 
with the preceding group, the poetry of the eleventh contury. 
In the second place there is to be noted the constantly enlarg- 
ing territory included in the action. The districts to the north 
and east of France still retain the preponderance of the action, 
but in no exclusive degree; the whole of France is involved, 
and Italy as well. This broadening of the field of action is of 
course quite in keeeping with the gradually extending power 
of the king of France. 


XII 

The general observations that result from the above analysis 
of the place-names in the feudal poetry may be briefly stated 
as follows: In the first place, it is evident that the various 
poems reflect to a considerable degree the political geography 
of France at the respective epochs of composition of the indi- 
vidual poems. Conversely, this coincidence of data in history 
and poetry confirms the ages assigned to the various chansons. 

88 Cf. Langlois, Table des Noms propres, sub voce. 


28 


GEOGRAPHY OF THE FEUDAL EPIC 


There is a certain confusion due to an indefinite use of the 
word France, resulting from the failure to distinguish, in the 
post-Carolingian and Feudal periods, between the territory 
directly ruled by the king, and that affliated with the French 
nation by race and preference. 

Secondly, it has been observed that the poems which are 
the most feudal in spirit and age are those in which the geo- 
graphical details are treated with the greatest accuracy; 
namely, Raoul de Cambrai, Garin le Loherain, Mort Gari. In 
this group of feudal poetry, the more a chanson tends towards 
the roman d’aventure style, the less accurate is the geography, 
as in the Hervis de Metz, Guy de Bourgogne, etc. And the 
same proportion of correctness in the same poems will be 
found, as the discussion of succeeding chapters will show, 
to prevail in regard to the feudal customs reflected by the 
poetry. 

Finally, as indicating in a general way the locality of the 
composition, the scene of the action of the poetry may be 
traced thus: during the ninth century the poetry had its origin 
on the eastern borderlands of France and the adjacent coun- 
tries. The authors were French, if not by political affiliation, at 
least by racial connection and personal preference. Almost 
at the same time the field of action spread along the northern 
border, implying a similar extension of composition. During 
the tenth century, the Raoul de Cambra, and the Auberi le 
Bourgoing evidence the action even more definitely in these 
same districts, Picardy and Bourgogne especially. The eleventh 
century shows a continuation of the original influence, but in 
addition marks the beginning of the extension of the action to 
southwestern France. In the more accurate poems of this 
time, however, the Garin, and the Mort Garin, the territorial 
preference is still Picardy, Champagne, and the Ile-de-France. 
Finally, in the twelfth century, the process of diffusion is com- 
pleted: practically the whole of France is included impartially 
-in the action of the poetry, and Italy has come to play a con- 
siderable part. From this time on, geography has no general 
value for the determination of the origin of the Feudal French 
poetry. 

29 


CHAPTER III 


TRAITS OF THE FEUDAL BARON. 


I 


The purpose of the present chapter is to point out certain 
salient traits of character of the feudal baron’ as he is 
portrayed in the body of the poetry specified in chapter I 
of this study, represented as dwelling within territory the ex- 
tent of which has been delimited in chapter II. In the last 
quarter of the nineteenth century there appeared two notable 
works on medieval life and customs, Das hdéfische leben by 
Alwin Schultz (1879-80),? and La Chevalerie by Léon Gautier 
(1884). The studies of both these scholars are of great con- 
structive value in this field, yet by the very nature of their 
methods of approach neither has given a composite portrait 
of the feudal man as he really was in those times. Schultz’s 
work, done from the point of view of an art historian, has 
rather the value of a dictionary of medieval life in almost 
itemized detail, whereas Gautier has produced an historical 
novel with the Knight of Chivalry depicted in high romantic 
coloring. Both writers drew their materials from virtually 
identical sources. Each method has its defect as a medium of 
interpretation of the inner qualities of the feudal man, espe- 
cially by reason of the use of sources so widely divergent in 
age and quality as the Roland, the later roman d’aventure, 
and the Court Epic. The endeavor in this study, necessarily 
much more restricted in scope, is to avoid either of these ex- 


1The distinction is to be made between the modern title of baron, 
conferred by the royal authority, and the feudal meaning of the word. 
Baron is here used in the feudal sense, i.e., primarily, any one of the 
great feudal lords, and secondarily any valiant watrior. 

2 Das héfische leben zur zeit der minnesinger, 2d ed., Leipzig, 1889- 
90. 


30 


TRAITS OF THE FEUDAL BARON' 


tremes by considering only those characteristics which are of 
first importance, while at the same time limiting the study to 
the period of the full and unhindered operation of feudalism, 
from the beginning of the eleventh century to the opening 
years of the thirteenth. 

At the outset, account must be taken of the fact that there 
is no full and connected depiction of character in any of the 
historical sources bearing on this age. The chronicles of the 
period deal primarily with events, and character appears only 
through the narration of deeds of action in the form of annals. 
Yet this is rather an advantage, for even were some his- 
torical figure described in the fullest detail, it would be 
unwarrantable to assume that such an individual was of neces- 
sity representative of the men of his age. A truer idea of the 
nature of man is to be reached through a composite constructed 
by means of an interpretation of the acts of many men, acts 
that are typical because, at least in the poetic material, they are 
repeated constantly in separate instances. 

There are three historians whose works afford valuable 
testimony of the epoch of feudalism in which they lived: 
Ordericus Vitalis, to the west of the feudal territory delimited 
in the preceding chapter ; Villehardouin, to the east of the same 
- territory, and Mouskes to the north. Ordericus Vitalis (1077- 
1141), living in Normandy, was in direct touch with feudal 
France; and his chronicle, unlike the lifeless tabulation of 
events common to the period, evidences his active mind, awake 
to the critical value of the material he treated. Geoffroi de 
Villehardouin (ca. 1164-ca. 1219), of Champagne, was first of 
all a warrior, and afterwards a historian. His work breathes 
the life and energy that distinguished this author. Philippe de 
Mouskes (ca. 1215-1282), of Hainaut, although not feudal in 
time, is known to be a reliable source with regard to the feudal 
period. In addition to these historians, mention may be made of 
the verse history of Guillaume le Maréchal, regent of England 
from 1216 until his death in 1219. This last work is fairly ac- 
curate historically, but less penetrating than the other three in 
character depiction. 


31 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


Paucity of details in delineation is a common failing of the 
period. Action was what interested the writers; instead of 
analysis they offered ordinarily a few stock descriptive phrases. 
The usual form of characterization of a man in Guillaume le 
Maréchal is the mention of a single trait, as where, for example, 
it is stated of the son of Henry II of England that “the young 
king was generous, as becomes a king’s son.”* Mouskes, for 
his part, contents himself with saying that the warrior was 
valiant, wise, and courteous,* while Villehardouin limits his 
analysis to saying, upon the demise of one of his fellow nobles 
(and on several other occasions), that his death was a great 
loss to Christianity.® 

Ordericus is the only one of the four historians who com- 
ments in a distinctive way upon the different traits that marked 
a given man above the others of his entourage. So, for in- 
stance, he says of Geoffroi, son of Rotro, count of Mortagne 
(near Alencon) that he was generous, handsome and strong; 
that he had among his subjects warlike barons and brave gov- 
ernors of castles; that he gave his daughters in marriage to 
men of the rank of counts, from whom sprang a noble race of 
children, so that Geoffroi was famed not only for his valor and 
courage, but by reason of his wealth and alliances.® Even in 
this description it is noteworthy how little is given directly of 
the actual traits of the count, and how much interest is dis- 
played in the manner in which his character was manifested. 


8 T’histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal, ed. Meyer, Paris, 1891-94, vv. 
1967 ff. The passage refers to Henry, who in 1170 was nominally 
associated as king with his father, Henry II, and bore the title, al- 
though he did not live to succeed his father. 

*Vaillans et sages et gentius; Chronique rimée de Philippe Mouskes, 
ed. De Reiffenberg, II, Bruxelles 1838 (vol. I, 1836). Cf. vv. 150109, 
15145, 15147, 15207, 15328-9, 15424-5, 15867-8, 16713, 19452. 

5 De la Conqueste de Constantinoble par Geoffroi de Villehardouin 
et Henri de Valenciennes, ed. P. Paris, 1838, cxxv: grant domages 
fu a la crestienté. Cf. cxxx, and again cLvtt. 

6 Ordericus Vitalis, Historia ecclesiastica, ed. Le Prevost, Paris, 1838- 
55, Liber VIII, chap. V, a. 1088: Goisfredus ....erat magnanimus, 
corpore pulcher et validus ...; strenuosque barones, et in bellis acres 
oppidanos suae ditioni subditos habebat. Filias quoque suas consulari- 
bus viris dedit in matrimonio ... ex quibus orta est elegans sobolis 
generosae propago. Goisfredus itaque comes tot stemmatibus exorna- 
batur, et armis animisque cum divitiis et amicis fulciebatur. 


32 


TRAITS OF THE FEUDAL BARON 


To the question, raised by this passage, of the part that mili- 
tary holdings and alliances by marriage had in determining the 
status of the individual, further attention will be paid later, in 
connection with the position of the feudal baron with respect 
to his milieu. 

Like all histories of the period, the feudal poetry gives ex- 
pression to no deliberate estimate of the nature of the feudal 
baron. But in another regard the poetry surpasses the history 
as a basis for the interpretation of medieval character. And 
this advantage of the poems over the chronicles lies in the 
greater freedom of treatment open to the poet. In the poetry, 
as in the historical documents, character must be searched out 
through action only. But whereas any single incident in history 
is of value primarily as indicative of the intimate qualities of 
the person concerned, and only indirectly as descriptive of the 
typical man of the age, the poetry on the contrary was born 
of the poet’s composite idea of the men of his time, and was 
built out of many actual instances. And this delineation was 
not limited in expression by the necessity of following details 
of circumstance which rendered the history specific in applica- 
tion, in contrast with the poetry descriptions, comprehending 
as they did national traits in the narration of single episodes.” 

By reason of the custom of referring to the French feudal 
poetry as epic, it is necessary to call attention to the fact that 
there is no epic idealization in any of the poems of the feudal 
group. The exception to be noted is the Roland, which is not 
strictly feudal, for between this single instance of the national 
epic and the rest of the provincial or feudal poetry there is a 
wide gap.® Gautier, in his treatment of the later chivalry, failed, 
to appreciate fully the earlier origin of this feudal poetry, and 
idealized the crude scenes of feudal life in keeping with his 
depiction of the Christian institution of Chivalry. For the 
feudal poetry rightly depicts just such an uncouth warrior, not 


7 National, applied to France at this epoch, is approximately coinci- 
. dent with the territory delimited in the preceding chapter. 

8 The Homeric epic, of course, is taken as the standard of judgment; 
it is characterized by its national quality. The feudal poetry, on the 
other hand, is provincial or sectional. 


33 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


far removed from the savage in the mode of his life, as might 
be expected of the age and environment of early feudalism. 
And if in the poetry instances are rare of the gentler side of 
man’s nature, it is only due to the fact that the poems reflect 
what was actual in feudal conditions.® 


II 


The most evident trait of character of the feudal French 
noble as described in the epic poetry is a bravery bordering on 
insolence. This is illustrated with more than ordinary clear- 
ness in Garin le Loherain, a poem of the end of the twelfth 
century, but containing custom material of at least a century 
earlier. The passage of import in this connection relates how 
Begon, the brother of Garin le Loherain, besieged Naisil, the 
stronghold of Bernard. The poet tells that the garrison made 
sallies from time to.time against the besieger, and in one of the 
ensuing mélées Bernard was captured by Begon, who there- 
upon demanded the surrender of Naisil. Bernard assented and 
called upon his son to yield up the castle for him. And the 
son, Faucon, defiantly replied, with a sort of primitive humor: 
“You ask the surrender of the castle to no purpose, for if I had 
one foot in Paradise and the other in the castle of Naisil, I 
would withdraw the one from Paradise and put it back in 
Naisil!” And then Bernard, realizing that his son’s words 
sealed the sentence of death upon him (Bernard), showed his 
careless valor in no doubtful wise. For he laughed outright, and 
then spoke without fear of consequences. “Surely,” cried 
Bernard, “I know that you are my son, and that your mother 
has never sinned against me!” Begon, of course, flew into a 
rage, but eventually compromised, and the surrender of the 
castle was made on condition that the defenders might depart 
in peace.?° 

® Apropos of the conditions of life at this time, the following verses 
are of import, showing the poet’s realization of the comparatively 
short life of the man of that epoch (ca. 1225); om sol viure joves cent 
anz, /aora wes mais del terz menz. Sordello, Lensegnamen d’onor 


(Vita e Poesie di Sordello di Goito, De Lollis, no. 40, vv. 134-5.) 
10 Garin, 1, pp. 232-233. 


34 


TRAITS OF THE FEUDAL BARON 


This insolent courage was born of the universal reliance 
upon superior strength. Another aspect of this domination of 
the physical element in the feudal régime is the fact that the 
extent of the dependence of one fief upon another, and con- 
sequently of one man upon another, was in direct ratio to the 
psysical and moral strength of either man, if moral is taken 
in the sense of strength of character. Men did not wish, of 
course, to be subject to an overlord; they were compelled to 
this submission by reasons of expediency. And it was the 
constant effort of every individual to strengthen the bond of 
those holding of him, while at the same time asserting himself 
as independent as possible in regard to his superior. This 
struggle, and the measure of its success, is most easily observed 
in the case of the king and those barons holding directly of 
him, by reason of the greater faithfulness of the portrayal of 
these personages in history and in poetry. 

The fearless independence of the greater barons towards 
the king is shown by an episode in the Garin, when Hervis 
came to the king to request aid against the Saracens, who were 
besieging his city of Metz. Hervis put his demand in unequi- 
vocal terms: “I come to you, Emperor, for it is your duty to 
guarantee the fief since I hold it of you.” And when, being 
advised by Hardré, an enemy of the Loherain family, the king 
refused, the Duke Hervis went stark mad with rage. Then, 
after an eloquent speech, in which he reminded the king of the 
service he had aforetime rendered his royal master, he angrily 
broke off his allegiance, declaring: “Since you fail me, I shall 
seek aid elsewhere. And I shall no longer hold my fief of you, 
nor so long as you live shall you ever have it again.’”%* And 
_ from there he went to Anseis, king of Cologne, and offered to 
hoid the fief of him in return for military aid. 

This incident is also a pertinent example of the faithfulness 
_ of the poetry as a reflection of actual conditions. An exact 
counterpart is to be found in the Chronicle of Ordericus Vi- 
talis. The historian relates that in the year 1090, Raoul II, 

11 [bid., pp. 52-55. Cf. Aliscans, 3056 ff.: Et dist aw rois; Vostre 
fief vous rendons! 

35 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


lord of Conches (in the present department of Eure), when 
his territory was laid waste by Count William of Evreux, went 
to the court of Duke Robert, of whom he held, and laying 
before him an account of the losses to which he was exposed 
by the aggressions of his neighbors, demanded the aid which 
he had a right to expect from his liege lord. But when his 
complaints proved fruitless and he obtained no redress, he 
turned his attention to another quarter, being compelled to 
seek a protector where he could. He therefore made applica- 
tion through his envoys to Willliam II (Rufus), king of Eng- 
land, and promised the king the fealty of all his estates if he 
would lend him assistance. The king was highly pleased at 
the proposal, and promised aid adequate to his needs. Conse- 
quently he gave orders to his retainers in Normandy that they 
should render every assistance to. Raoul, which they accord- 
ingly did.?? | 

Somewhat later in the Garin the independence of the barons 
is even more pointedly set forth in brief concise form. The 
family of Fromont planned to fall upon the Loherains in the 
very court of the king, for, as the poet explains, “the king was 
young, and not one whit did they fear him.”’!® And the on- 
slaught took place without the king’s being able to prevent it. 

Akin to this restive spirit of the feudal noble was his utter 
lack of self-restraint, manifesting itself in uncontrolled fits of 
wrath. The frequent resort to anger is an epic trait, common 
to the Iliad and the Odyssey, and to the French feudal poetry. 
But its depiction in the feudal poems is none the less a true 

12 Ordericus, Lib. VIII, cap. XIV, a. 1090. Radulfus Rodbertum 
ducem adivit, querelas damnorum, quae a contribulibus suis pertulerat, 
intimavit, et herile adjutorium ab eo poposcit; sed frustra, quia mhil 
obtinuit. Hine alias conversus est, et utile sibi patrocinium quaerere 
compulsus est. Regem Angliae per legatos suos interpellavit, eique sua 
infortunia mandavit, et si sibi suffragaretur, se et omnia sua promisit. 
His auditis rex gavisus est, et efficax adminiculum indigenti pollicitus 
est... tribunis et centurionibus, qui praeerant in Normannia familiis 
ejus, mandavit ut Radulfum totis adjuvarent nisibus, et oppida ejus 
munirent necessariis omnibus, Illi autem regiis jussionibus alacriter 
obsecundaverunt. 

18 Garin, I, p. 129: Li rois fu joenes, n’i ot point de raison, /Ne le 


douterent vaillant un esperon. C#. the scene in Aliscans 2894 ff., when 
Guillaume stands in the king’s presence with drawn sword. 


36 


TRAITS OF THE FEUDAL BARON 


portrayal of the early medieval nobleman in France, prone as he 
was to hot-headed, reckless action.14 The poem of Garin 
especially (including the Mort Garin), perhaps because of its 
nature more primitive than most of the feudal poetry, stands 
distinctly apart in this respect from the other poems of the 
feudal group. For the poem of Garin depends almost ex- 
clusively upon crude scenes of sudden wrath to strengthen and 
prolong the narrative. 

According to the story, King Pepin had promised Blancheflor 
in marriage to Garin. Fromont, whose family had been at feud 
with the Loherains for many years, attempted to persuade the 
king to change his decision, and to award to him the gift of the 
lady’s hand. At the first word, Garin went white-hot with rage, 
but he choked his anger for the moment and made a soft voice 
belie the deadly menace of his words: “My lord Fromont, so 
help me God, if this morning when we two rode together 
through the woods of Val-Dormant, you had merely said that 
you found the lady to your liking, I would have given her to 
you, and her fief besides. But now I see your treachery, so 
that from me you will not have the amount of one single farth- 
ing.” Fromont reddened with fury at the insult, and they would 
speedily have come to blows, except that the king parted them. 
And this small beginning was enough to cause a feud lasting a 
life-time, in which, as the poet says, “I know not how many 
knights were slain, and castles and cities brought to naught, 
and many were the children that were disinherited.”*® 

Again in the Garin a passage occurs which relates a similar 
display of unbridled wrath when the day set for the marriage 
finally arrived, and when Garin and Blancheflor stood before 
the altar as the priest proclaimed the bans. Suddenly a monk 
‘arose, and forhade the marriage on the basis of consanguinity.*® 


14 Cf, Jusserand, J. J., Les Sports et Jeux dexercice dans lancienne 
France, Paris, 1901, pp. 33-35. 

15 Garin, I, pp. 124-120. 

16.Consanguinity was frequently invoked at that time as an excuse 
for divorce, and for the prevention of marriage for political purposes. 
For an instance of the sort cf. Chronica Albrici Monacht Trium Font- 
ium, a. 1116 (Monumenta Germamae Historica, Scriptores, XXIII, 
or) : Cum Henricus rex Anglie quandam filiam suam cuidam nobili 

. vellet dare, idem Yvo matrimonium illud dissuadendo consanguin- 
itatem in sexto gradu conputavit. 
. 37 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


Whereupon Begon, the brother of Garin, sprang to his feet in 
sudden anger and struck the monk to the ground. And when 
the king, who did not relish this insult to his authority, ven- 
tured to protest, Begon shouted angrily: “This is no monk, 
he is a perjurer and liar! By the body of Saint Martin, if I 
get him outside this palace, I tell you solemnly that no man 
on earth can assure him that I will not slay him.’ And it 
was some little while before Begon could be induced to desist, 
for a time at least, from the immediate execution of his 
purpose. 

Still one other passage from the same poem shows the extent 
of lawlessness to which such yielding to sudden passion often 
led. Upon this occasion the king’s messenger came to Fromont 
with an unwelcome demand. Now in so far as anything was 
held sacred in those times, a messenger, or envoy, was consid- 
ered inviolable during his mission. But Fromont was dis- 
pleased with the message, and grasping a knife he struck 
at the envoy, and missing him, slew a young man who stood 
near. Then Fromont reached for another knife and would 
have made a second attempt had not the messenger escaped 
by the aid of one of the other barons.*® 

Nor is such reasonless anger lacking in the records of his- 
tory. Ordericus relates in his account of the sack of Rome 
by Robert Guiscard in 1084 that when the troops of Robert 
entered Rome, they set fire to the city by the order of their 
furious Duke.*® Again the same historian tells that when 
William the Conqueror took Mantes in 1087, his men in their 
fury set fire to the castle, which was consumed, together with” 
the churches and houses, and two nuns also perished in the 

17 Garin, II, pp. 9-10. 

18 Garin, I, pp. 213-214. Cf. fate of the messengers in the Quatre 
Fils Aymon, 245 ff. ; and 610 ff. Cf. also the treatment of the envoys 
by Richard Ceur de Lion, infra, p. 39. The chess-board quarrels re- 
lated in various feudal poems deserve mention as a traditional cause 


of wars; cf. Quatre Fils Aymon, to10 ff., and Chevalerie Ogier de 
Danemarche, ed. Barrois, J., Paris, 1842, vv. 3155 ff. 

19 Ordericus, lib. VII, cap. VII, a. 1084: Deinde victores, civibus mixti 
fugientibus, urbem intraverunt, jussuque fervidi ducis ignem tectis in- 
jecerunt. 


38 


TRAITS OF THE FEUDAL BARON 


flames.?° In Guillaume le Maréchal a story is told of Richard 
Coeur de Lion, at the time when towards the end of his life 
he was waging war with the king of France.”4 French envoys 
arrived for a peace parley, and arrangements had practically 


been completed for a five-year truce, when one of the envoys 


ventured to request of Richard the release of the Bishop of 
Beauvais, who had been taken prisoner a few days before. 
Thereupon Richard became speechless with rage and broke off 
the negotiations, and so great was his wrath that the French 
considered themselves fortunate to escape with their lives.”* 
An instance from Mouskes is so relevant and so true to the 
period that it is not to be passed over without mention. Mouskes 
began his chronicle with the mythological origin of France, and 
continued it to the year 1243. The work is of little value until 
the eleventh century, and even then it is not always trustworthy 
in the minutiae of historical events. But Mouskes was par- 
ticularly interested in the feudal period, and his account of 
that epoch is of the highest value in that it portrays incidents 
in accordance with feudal custom. So the spirit of the fol- 
lowing episode may be taken as characteristic, whether or not 
it occurred exactly as the historian relates it. William the 
Conqueror, he says,?* at this time Duke of Normandy (ca. 
1054), requested Count Bauduin of Flanders for the hand of 
his daughter, whereat the Count was highly pleased, and gave 
his consent. But when she was informed of the match by her 
father, she declared that she preferred the seclusion of a 
convent to marriage with a bastard. The Count, her father, 
of course was angry, but not so enraged as was Duke William 
when the matter was recounted to him. The Duke went forth- 
with into the lady’s presence, and kicked and beat her wellnigh 
to death. Now the remarkable fact is that the father was not 


20 [bid., lib. VII, cap. XIV, a. 1087: Irruens itaque exercitus regis 
cum oppidants portas pertransivit, et per rabiem armigerorum immisso 
igne castrum cum ecclesuis et aedibus combussit. Cf. also note of 


editor. 


21 Anno I199, the year in which Richard died. 
22 Guillaume le Maréchal, 11576 ff. 
23 Mouskes, 16900 ff. 


39 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


offended, nor is Mouskes conscious of anything out of the 
ordinary. Quite the contrary is true, for in the next breath 
Mouskes continues: 

Cis Guillaumes fu moult preudom 

Del commencement jusqu’a[1] som.?4 

Such a burst of anger was not so uncommon as to excite 
attention. The final word is said when the lady declares that 
she would now truly like to marry the Duke, for until he beat 
her she had not realized what a valiant man he was!?>- 

The poetry, too, reflects this brutality as exhibited even to- 
wards women; in Garin le Loherain a scene similar to the pre- 
ceding ensued when the queen rebuked the king because he had 
deserted his friends for the sake of a paltry bribe. Whereupon 
the king became very petulant, and raising his glove, struck 
her across the face.*® 

Such scenes both in history and poetry are frequent, but the 
case is not always one of untempered savagery; it was rather 
that the man was governed by impulse, without the interven- 
tion of sane consideration or consciousness of any law until 
after the deed was done. Decribing a scene like the above in 
Aubert le Bourgoing, when Auberi had struck his daughter-in- 
law so fiercely that the blood flowed down, the poet adds that 
a few seconds later Auberi was grieved within his heart for 
having struck her.” 

Quick to anger the feudal noble certainly was, and brutal in 
the manifestation of his wrath. But the same impulsiveness 
that was at the bottom of such displays of temper resulted in a 
repentance that sometimes followed fast upon the misdeed. 
This has been partially exemplified by the preceding incident 
from the Auberi, and is very clearly illustrated by the Raoul de 


24 Tbid., 16992-3. 

25 Ibid., 17328 ff: J’el prendroie ore, sil voloit, /Quar jou sai bien 
que moult valoit /Li dus, ki ¢caiens me vint batre. 

26 Mort Garin, p. 103. Cf. Mouskes, a. 1150 ca., vv. 16682-87: 
Guillaumes Talevas [younger son of Guillaume de Belléme] fu preus 
/Mais trop estoit fel et crueus, /Quar il fist, a I aviesprer, /Heude- 
bours, sa fame, estranler, /Pour cou qu’ele li reprouvoit /Les cruautés 
que il faisoit. 

27 Auberi, ed. Tarbé, p. 66. 


40 


TRAITS OF THE FEUDAL BARON 


Cambrai. In the latter poem it is related that when Raoul dis- 
covered that his men had disobeyed his command to pitch his 
tent in the court of the convent of Origny, Raoul was bitterly 
incensed at his retainers and broke into a tirade of violent 
threats. Then Guerri, Raoul’s uncle, answered somewhat im- 
patiently, setting forth in sharp manner the good reasons why 
Raoul’s instructions had not been followed. And Raoul, his 
wrath vanishing as quickly as it had burst out, replied: “Have 
it as you say; leave it so since you wish it.’”° 

The most pertinent instance, showing at once the extremes 
of wrath and repentance, is to be found in another passage of 
the same poem, It was when Raoul, having burned the convent, 
boasted how utterly he intended to crush the sons of Herbert, 
the kinsmen of his esquire Bernier. Bernier ventured to say a 
word in their behalf, and when Raoul heard him he began to 
curse Bernier roundly and to accuse him of treason,?® and 
ended with the taunt: “Save for contempt of you I would 
strike off all your limbs. Who is it that keeps me from crush- 
ing you on the spot!’®° And Bernier replied hotly: ‘Though 
I see you so insolent, you would not dare strike me for any 
consideration!”’ Then Raoul strode up to Bernier and dealt 
him such a blow that the blood flowed down and stained his 
ermine cloak.** 

Bernier, of course, was insanely enraged, and renounced his 
allegiance to Raoul. And at once Raoul regretted his deed. 
So “he knelt down, and by reason of his great love he spoke 
eloquently: ‘Bernier, harden not thyself against me. Wilt 
thou not take a fair amend? Not that I fear at all thy anger, 
but that I would be thy friend.’”’ In all humility Raoul pleads, 


“Bernier, my brother, thy valor is not questioned; grant me 


peace, and put aside thy ill-feeling.”*? 


28 Raoul de Cambrai, 1262-1284. Cf. the account of a similar fit of 
rage related by Ordericus of William Rufus, and his sudden calming 
at the well-chosen words of the barons of his retinue: Ordericus, lib. 
VIII, cap. II, a. 1088: His auditis rex iratus est, et valde rigidus 
intumuit, etc. 

29 Raoul de Cambrai, 1652-1656. 

30 [bid., 1700-1702. 

81 [bid., 1710-1718. 

82 [bid., 1756-1762, and 1780-1782. 


41 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH .EPIC 


Although the feudal noble was cruel and relentless when in 
the position of advantage, and was recklessly brave in the 
heat of battle, it is shown in the poetry that he did not maintain 
a heroic level. The depiction of the weaker side of strong men 
distinguishes the French feudal poetry from the Greek epic, 
and that fact offers further evidence of the faithfulness of the 
portrayal of life in the feudal poems. In the Raoul de Cambrai 
occurs a notable example of the reversal of character on the 
part of a brave warrior. It is in the description of the great 
battle between Raoul and the sons of Herbert, when Ernaut of 
Douai, after fighting valiantly against Raoul, lost his hand by a 
sword-stroke. At once his vaunted bravery melted away and 
the weakness of the man contrasted with his hitherto valorous 
conduct, and he begged piteously for his life: ‘Mercy, Raoul, 
for God’s sake have pity! If you are angered for that I have 
smitten you, I will be your man in whatsoever fashion you 
will. Have pity, Raoul, if it be in you! I ama young man and 
wish not to die yet. I will be a monk—willingly will I serve 
God. All my fiefs I give to you to hold.’’* 

In the Auberi, a poem rich in descriptive material, and less 
limited than is usual by the convention of verse, is a well- 
developed instance of this character trait. The story goes that 
the robber Lambert in friendly manner had induced Auberi 
to visit him, but with the treacherous intent of forcing Auberi 
to bestow upon him in marriage Sonneheut, Auberi’s daughter- 
in-law. Lambert set about accomplishing his purpose by first 
getting Auberi royally drunk, and when he had reached an 
unconscious state Lambert put him to bed in the same room 
with his (Lambert’s) niece. In the morning Lambert awak- 
ened his guest with a savage blow, and accusing him of having 
violated his niece, threatened to kill him. When Auberi heard 
him, the color left his face and he was afraid, and his words 
came in broken speech. Vainly did he deny the charge; 

33 [bid., 2880-2884, and 3011-3014: Merci! R., por Dieu qi tot cria. — 
/Vos hom serait ensi con vos plaira. /Qite vos clain tot Braibant et 
Hainau, /Qe ja mes oirs demi pié n’en tendra... /Merci! R., se le 


poez soufrir, /Jovenes hom sui, ne vuel encor morir. /Moines serait, si 
volrat Dieu servir. /Cuites te claim mes onnors a tenir. 


42 


TRAITS OF THE FEUDAL BARON 


Lambert only threatened the more, and brandished his naked 
sword, making pretense of striking Auberi. And Auberi, for 
the fear of death that he had, promised to give Sonneheut to 
Lambert, and swore this on the sacred relics.*4 This act of 
cowardice, so utterly contemptible from the modern point of 
view, does not receive any condemnation in the poem. There 
is no intimation of any consciousness on the part of the poet 
that Auberi had failed to maintain his honor. 

The absence of the conception of honor as it exists today is 
not peculiar to this one poem. It is equally true of the whole 
feudal group, especially of those reflecting the customs of 
feudalism in its earliest stages. The word honor is to be found 
of course in the poeiry, but there was no jot of the modern con- 
ception of the term attaching to honor at that time, and the 
sentiment itself can scarcely be said to have existed. Of the 
meanings denoted by the word in feudal society, the first and 
most frequent is that of an office or the fief attaching thereto. 
In addition, certain abstract connotations of the word existed. 
In the Quatre Fils Aymon, for example, honor denotes glory, 
renown, respect.*> Various other words and phrases in certain 
contexts admit the translation honor in the modern sense of 
moral and ethical obligation, but at closer view such instances 
_ invariably resolve into a more material consideration.* 

If any idea whatsoever existed of honor as in the best 
usage of the present day, it was as regards those customs of 


84 Auberi, ed. Tarbé, pp. 80-83. That submission to superior strength 
was not condemned is evidenced by the following lines from the 
Aliscans, vv. 626-7:. Se plus demeure por fol se puet tenir, /Quant 
por un cop en va requellir cinq, etc. 
+85 Cf. Quatre Fils Aymon, 1118: Matis voist en avanture pour honor 

conquester. And ibid., 6831-2: Miex vaut mors a honor que vivre a 
deshonor. Qui en fuiant morra, ja wait same pardon. Also Mort 
Garin, p. 29. Cf. also Quatre Fils Aymon, v. 466, and Guillaume le 
maréchal, 2089 and 2052. 

36 Faites le bien is a case of the sort: the phrase means merely do the 
advantageous thing, or sometimes, do what is customary: cf. Mort 
Garin, p. 73, v. 45 Garin, 1, p. 61, v. 73 1, p. 80, v. 113 L p. 218, v.13 TT, 
p. 182, v.11. Probably nothing more than valor in war is meant by the 
pompous declaration: Onques nostre linages ne fist jor se bien non. 
(Bibliothek des Litterarischen Vereins, LXVII, Stuttgart, 1862, Renaut 
de Montauban, ed. Michelant, p. 182, v. 5.) 


43 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


procedure involved in the feudal relation of homme-to-seigneur, 
and vice versa. This relationship is discussed in detail in the 
subsequent chapters, and there is to be mentioned at present 
only a single historical example illustrating from the point of 
view of character analysis the possible obligations of the 
relationship.*” 

In the year 1118, Henry I of England was requested by 
Eustace de Breteuil to restore to him the castle of Ivry, which 
had belonged to his predecessors. Henry temporized, but in 
order to keep Eustace’s allegiance gave to him as hostage the 
son of Ralph-Harenc who had the custody of the fortress ; and 
in turn Henry took as hostages the two daughters of Eustace, 
who were his own grand-daughters. Eustace, excited by 
Amauri de Montfort, who strove to renew the quarrel, put out 
the boy’s eyes, and in that condition sent him back to his 
father. Upon this the father went to the king in a rage, and 
made known to him the cruel treatment his son had received. 
Henry then delivered up his two grand-daughters whom he 
held in hostage of Eustace, that the father might immediately 
wreak his vengeance upon them. Accordingly, Ralph-Harenc, 
with the permission of the king, seized Eustace’s daughters, 
and tore out their eyes and cut off the tips of their noses, in 
retaliation for the cruelty inflicted upon his son by their 
rather: 

As might be inferred from the absence of all idea of honor, 
the religious tendencies of the feudal noble reached no very 
high stage of development. True conscientious appreciation 


87 An idea of honor inhered partially in customs concerning the 
conduct of war. Thus at times safe-conduct would seem sacred; cf. 
Garin, I, p. 69: Buegons apéle le vassal Amauri /Dites Richard 
wiegne parler a mi, /Il n’aura garde, loiaument li affi. And Richard 
comes without fear of his enemy, and departs in safety. But such 
was not always the case: cf. the death of Beuves d’Aigremont (Quatre 
Fils Aymon), and in the same poem, ‘'Charlemagne’s plot against the 
four sons of Aymon. At best it was a question of the observance of 
custom rather than scrupulous conduct. 

38 Ordericus, lib. XII, cap. X, a. 1119: In eodem anno, Eustachius de 
Britolio, gener regis, crebro commonitus fuit a contribulibus et con- 
sanguineis ut a rege recederet, nisi ipse turrim Ibreti, quae anteces- 
sorum ejus fuerat, ei redderet, etc. 


44 


TRAITS OF THE FEUDAL BARON 


of religious principles was foreign to the age; its place was 
usurped by formality and superstition.*® 

The formal nature of the influence of the Church is well 
illustrated by an episode from the Raoul de Cambrai. Raoul 
had just burned the convent of Origny, where a hundred nuns 
perished in the conflagration. His retinue had made no pro- 
test, excepting Bernier, whose mother was one of those that 
suffered death as a consequence of Raoul’s barbarity. But 
when at the close of the day Raoul ordered a sumptuous feast 
to be prepared—roasted peacocks, peppered swans, and ven- 
ison in rich abundance—the steward felt constrained to re- 
buke his master: 

“In God’s name, what outrage do you intend? You are 
forswearing Christianity and its sacraments! It is Lent, when 
one ought to fast in memory of the sacred covenant for which 
sinners adore the cross. And we wretches who have sinned 
today will never find peace with God unless his compassion 
overcomes our impiety.” And Raoul replied: “Fool, why 
speak to me of that? This day’s deed was but a consequence 
of the ill treatment the people of Origny committed against 
my esquires, and they have rightly paid the penalty. But in- 
deed, I had forgotten it was Lent.”*° Thus Raoul, defending 
himself on the score of massacring a hundred nuns, admitted 
that he was at fault in that he had not observed the formalities 
of a Lenten day. 

_ Aside from this perfunctory consideration of Church form- 

39 A story such as that told of Henry IV, Emperor of Germany, is 
typical of the feeble hold of the Church upon the more powerful 
nobles. Ordericus (lib. VII, cap. IV, a. 1081) relates that Henry, 
having been excommunicated by Pope Gregory VII, laid siege to 
Rome, and: Inquirentibus vero, cur tam horrenda contra caput Eccle- 
siae praesumpserat, hanc tantae discordiae causam inter se et Papam 
esse, cum cachinno asserebat, quod medicus aegrotum nimis acriter 
curare impotientem misus fuerat. In similar nature, the chronicle of 
Ordericus contains examples of the high value attached to relics, and 
the unscrupulous means employed for obtaining things deemed so ‘holy. 
Cf. the story of the method used to obtain relics: lib. VII, cap. xm, a. 
1087: Volumus hine sanctum corpus tollere, nostramque ad patriam 
transportare, etc. 

40 Raoul de Cambrai, 1560-1582. The formality and the thinness of 


the veneer of religion is exemplified by the account of Foulques 
d’Anjou, in Raoul Glaber, Libri Quinque, lib. II, cap. tv. 


45 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


alities, a second phase of religion that prevailed widely in the 
Middle Ages was superstition.** The most common form of 
superstition is premonition, an anticipation or warning in some 
fashion or other, of events in the future. The Garin yields a 
pertinent example. The family of the Loherains were at peace 
for a brief space between the ever-recurring feuds. Garin is 
depicted in conversation with his wife: “May Saint Mary 
guard me and all my friends,” said Garin. “My heart fails 
me, I am altogether bewildered. It seems that the heavens 
should thunder. Shield me, O God, from evil.” “Good sir,” 
said the lady Aélis, “make the sign of the cross upon your face 
that naught evil may come upon you.” And Garin replied, “So 
be it, lady.”” And he raised his hand to cross himself. And at 
that moment there appeared in the distance horsemen ap- 
proaching slowly. And when they were come near, they dis- 
mounted, and Garin saw that they bore the dead body of Begon, | 
his brother, than whom he loved no one more dearly.” 

The clearest expression of this intermingling of religion and 
superstition in the poetry is the first half of the Raoul de 
Cambrai, comprising the whole story of the life of Raoul. The 
recitation is an echo of the doctrine of the ever-present hand 
of God in the life of men, but in its actual form was far more 
a matter of superstition than of religion. The first three 
thousand lines of this poem, relating the downfall of Raoul, 
may be divided into three parts, each representing a distinct 
step forward in the ill-fated career of Raoul. 

The first of these stages in the narration is reached at the 
point when Raoul was preparing to invade the Vermandois. 

41 The question of magic deserves mention apropos of superstition. 
Maugis the Robber, which is a minor theme of the Quatre Fils Aymon, 
is the best instance from the poetry. Cf. in Mouskes the legend of 
Gerbert’s transaction with the devil, told in good faith as history. De 
Reiffenberg’s note to the passage is pertinent: Chronique rimée, 15442ff. 
Also the story of Berengarius, in Chronica Albrici Monachi Trium 
Fontium, in MGH, SS, XXIII, p. 780, line 25 ff. The credulity of the 
age is most shown in Raoul Glaber: cf. the story of St. Brendan in- 
corporated into his history, Libri Quinque, lib. II, cap. 11. 

42 Garin, Il, p. 261. Cf. the instance of premonition by a dream in 
Ordericus, lib. VIII, cap. x1v, a. 1000: Nuper vidi somnium, quo valde 


territus sum, etc. Cf. the story of Wlferius, Raoul Glaber, Libri Quin- 
que, lib. II cap. 1x. 


46 


TRAITS OF THE FEUDAL BARON 


His mother, after having tried in vain to dissuade him, said: 
“Since for my sake you will not abandon your plan, may 
almighty God never bring you back safe nor sound nor well!’ 
And by reason of this curse, the poet adds, Raoul suffered 
such affliction, that he lost his life thereby.*® 

The next period culminates in Raoul’s command to his 
retinue: “Barons, set fire to the village of Origny**—an act 
of impiety that was the first consequence of the mother’s curse. 

The final stage in Raoul’s undoing came when Raoul blas- 
phemed God and his saints. It was when he had conquered 
Ernaut in battle, and Ernaut begged that his life be spared. 
Raoul then denied him mercy, with the oath “‘Neither earth 
nor grass can save you, nor God nor man can aid you, nor all 
the saints who serve God!’’*® That oath sealed his fate, for by 
it he denied God. And Ernaut was conscious of the import of 
the moment, for he raised his head, and courage came back to 
him, and he defied Raoul fearlessly, because Raoul had re- 
nounced God and his compassion.*® And with that Bernier 
came up and engaged Raoul, and slew him. 

* 
III 

In subsequent chapters of this study is discussed the social 
and political status of the feudal noble. In the present survey 
of the feudal noble as an individual, only those factors are to 
be considered which determined in the case of each baron 
just how high he should stand in the hierarchic society of his 
day. And it was a single element that settled inevitably the 
position of every noble. This element was superior strength 
in one or another of its phases: not only physical strength of 
the individual, but, of far greater importance, the military 
strength of his fiefs, and of those of his kin. 

The importance of strength of body enters into many of 
the examples that have been adduced in another connection. 

43 Raoul de Cambrai, 1131-1135. 

44 [bid., 1553. 

45 Tbid., 3017-19: For form of oath incident to earth and grass, cf. 


infra, chap. IV, p. 64, note 28. 
46 [bid., 3015-3031. 


47 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


The successful man in the feudal régime was the one who, as 
the poet of Raoul de Cambrai says of Bernier, “was large and 
powerful when he attained the age of manhood,’’*’ that he 
might without fear stand before a great warrior, as Bernier 
did before Raoul, and say: “You dare not strike me!’’** Or 
as Garin said to another noble in the king’s court, “You have 
lied, sir! In the whole of France there is not a man so re- 
doubtable that if he insulted me I would not make him take 
back his words ere noonday.”*® 

Of greatest importance as a factor in the position of the 
feudal man was the strength represented in the number and 
greatness of his kinsmen; upon them he relied with even 
greater assurance than upon even his liege-men. Witness the 
summons of Begon when he was hard-pressed by his enemies: 
“Tell my brother, Garin the Loherain, that he aid me, and give 
my thanks to him; also go to Thieri who is my uncle and so 
ought not to fail me; nor forget Girard de Liege, and Garnier, 
and Hugo of Cambrai. And return by way of Ouri the Ger- 
man, and Auberi le Bourgoing. And tell my sister to send me 
her son and her nephews.”°® And when this family array 
masses its armies, they make hill and valley resound, and from 
all sides their columns guard every approach by road.*? 

The far-reaching bond of kinship was an asset of political 
value. In the Garin is related how the Bishop Henry of Reims 
availed himself of such an argument in order to dissuade the 
king from his purpose of giving the lady Blancheflor to 
Garin: “If Garin has her,” said the bishop, “‘you will see 
France shamed, for never will Fromont serve you nor will his 


47 Tbid., 382. 

48 [bid., 1711. 

49 Garin, II, p. 25. The essential nature of the physical element is 
evident in the descriptions given by poets and historians of the great 
feudal barons: cf. La Chevalerie Ogier de Danemarche, 6065 ff; Alis- 
cans, 2740 ff; Aubert, ed. Tobler, p. 28; Guillaume le Maréchal, 1800 ff; 
Ordericus, lib. VIII, cap. v, a. 1088, Erat .. corpore magnus et for- 
tis, audax et potens in arms... etc.; ibid., lib. VIII, cap. v, a. 1088, 
Goisfredus ... erat corpore pulcher et validus . . etc. 

50 Garin, II, p. 102. 

51 Mort Garin, pp. 25-20: cf. ibid., p. 9, and p. 30; also Garin, II, 
p. 127. 


48 


TRAITS OF THE FEUDAL BARON 


powerful family (mervillous lin). And war will never come 
to an end.”®? 

With the exception of the tie between lord and man result- 
ing from land consideration, this blood-relationship was the 
strongest reason for the mutual support of men at this time 
when discord rather than order was the rule. The instruction 
given by the queen to a newly dubbed knight expresses at any 
rate the accepted conception of the noble class: Love your 
kinsmen, hate your enemies.*®? In the Mort Garim, when 
Auberi’s faithfulness to his kin is questioned, he cries indig- 
nantly: “Think you, if ever mine own friends bound to me by 
ties of blood come in need to me, that I will deny them my 
bread and wine, or my castles and my cities?”** When Garin 
issues desfiance for himself, he includes his friends in the same 
breath:®> “Henceforth you are defied of me; guard yourself 
from all my kin!’*® 

How compelling was the obligation involved in kinship is 
most pointedly set forth in the following final example. In 
this passage, too, is evident something of the inner nature of 
the tie resultant from blood-relationship. For it was not 
necessarily a natural affection for one’s family that was at the 
base of the alliance, but sometimes, as in the following instance, 
it was merely an inevitable obligation met because neither 
party dared, by refusing the other assistance, deny himself 
the same aid that would be rendered him in like need. In 
brief, the bond was one of political necessity. As the story 


52 Garin, II, pp. 1-2: Né ses parages né son mervillous lin: variant 
of MS. St. Germ. 2041, Garin, II, 2, note 1. Cf. Mouskes, 16902-4: 
Duke William of Normandy plans to marry (a. 1154ca); Lors se 
volt li dus marier, /Pour ses amis emparenter, /Et pour soi mesmes 
enforcier. And in Guillaume le Maréchal, 2259, it is related that the 
young king ceased to fight when he had no boen ami charnel. Cf. also 
Ordericus, lib. VII, cap. x, a. 1083: Erat enim nobilitate clarus, etc. 
Also ibid., lib. VIII, cap. 1x, a. 1089: Tunc Rodberitus dux contra tot 
hostes repagulum paravit, filiamque suam, quam de pellice habuerat 

. conjugem dedit ... etc. \Cf. supra, p. 32, note 6, emphasis upon 
kinship. 
_ 53 Mort Garin, p. 84: Amez les vos, haez vos anemis. 

54 Tbid., pp. 79-80. 

55 For the connotation of desfiance, cf. infra, chap. v, p. 80. 

56 Mort Garin, p. 14. 


49 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


runs in the Garin, a certain Droés, fearing the enmity of 
Garin, and desiring to attach to himself a strong ally, married 
the sister of Bauduin. Bauduin consented, unaware of the 
hostility of Garin against Droés. And when, after the marriage, 
Bauduin learned the truth he had great fear, and for a space 
he was silent. Then he grew red with rage, and said: “Droés 
d’Amiens, you have deceived me. If you had told me before 
this, the marriage would never have taken place. But I know 
well that blood cannot be false, for he who cuts off his nose 
spares not his face. Wherefore it befits me to endure great 
pain, and together with you to maintain the war against 
Garin.’’>7 


The composite features given in the preceding pages are the 
result of an attempt to set forth the salient traits of character 
of a nobleman living in Northern France in the course of the 
eleventh and twelfth centuries. The effort has not been to give 
a classification of separate items in list form, but to make an 
analysis of a few typical traits that form a basis for the inter- 
pretation of the character of the feudal baron. This man was 
marked by the ease with which his cruder passions found ex- 
pression, and by his lack of the finer qualities, those of honor 
and religious scruple. It has been shown that he was the 
natural product of the institution of feudalism, and his inner 
qualities are no less explained by feudalism than the course of 
feudalism was determined by the nature of the man. That he 
was not Christian in action is obvious; Feudalism, in contrast 
with Chivalry, was of non-Christian origin. It has been ob- 
served during this discussion how the intimate traits of this 
feudal noble are to be traced only through the interpretation of 
his acts as recorded in historical sources and in the feudal 
poetry. The histories fail unaided to delineate sharply personal 
characteristics. They serve, however, to confirm the more 


57 Garin, I, p. 160: Li Flamens (Bauduins) Voit, tout en fut esbahis, 
/Une grant piece ala que mot ne dist. /Com il parole, de mautalent 
rougit: /Droés d’Amiens, dist-il, tu m’as trai: /Se autretant voire 
méusses dit/ ... Li mariages ne poist avenir. /Mais je sais bien que 
cuer ne puet mentir, /Qui son né coupe il deserte son vis. /Ains me 
convient les grans poines sofrir: /Ensanble o vous la guerre maintenir. 


50 


TRAITS OF THE FEUDAL BARON 


general descriptions of the poetry. And the comparison of the 
two, history and poetry, reveals with precision that whereas 

_ the poetry is of little or no value as a source of events in the 
nature of annals, the poetry is of higher value than even the 
chronicles and other strictly historical works of the period, as 
a reliable source for the analysis of character. 


51 


CHAPTER IV 


PRIMITIVE PHASES OF THE HOMME-A-SEIGNEUR 
RELATION IN HISTORY AND IN FEUDAL 
FRENCIL POR DRY, 


I 


Toward the end of the fifth century, with the weakening of 
the Roman military power in Gaul, there came a resistless 
advance of the Germanic Barbarians from beyond the Rhine. 
These peoples moved in great surges that extended gradually 
over the rich cultivated land of Gaul. There was no one 
decisive battle; there was no considerable opposition to the 
successive migrations. The Roman element in Gaul had been 
softened by generations of easy, indulgent life, and succumbed 
inevitably to the war-hardened men of the North. 

In 486, Syagrius, the last of the Roman governors in Gaul, 
fled before Chlodowig, or Clovis, chief of the Salian Franks, 
the most formidable of all the Barbarians. Clovis, on succeed- 
ing his father Childeric as chieftain or king of the tribe, had 
taken over an army of only some three thousand warriors. 
But the fame of his exploits, his success in war, drew many 
more fighting men to share in the spoils of victory. Thus it 
came about that he extended his authority until, at the be- 
ginning of the sixth century, he was recognized as king of all 

1For an excellent account of this period, cf. C. Oman, The Dark 
Ages, London, 1901, pp. 55 ff. Cf. also G. F. Young, East and West 
through Fifteen Centuries, London and New York, 1916, II, pp. 153-6. 
Also excellent for the period of the Frankish invasion is Western 
Europe in the Fifth Century, E. A. Freeman, London and New York, 
1904; cf. especially chap. IV, pp. 130-171, The Barbarian Invaders, and 
chap. VIII, pp. 288-305, Chlodowig the Frank. 

2Fustel de Coulanges, Institutions politiques de l’ancienne France, 
II, L’invasion germanique et la fin de l’empire, p. 480, Paris, 1891. Cf. 


C. Bayet, Clovis et la Société franque d’aprés la loi salique (E. Lavisse, 
Histoire de France, Il, partie I, chap. 1v, pp. 94-8, Paris 1903). 


52 


HOMME-A-SEIGNEUR RELATION 


the Franks; and the sovereignty of the Merovingians, who 
continued to rule for nearly three centuries in France, was at 
length established. 

The Barbarians, when they made their inroads into France, 
were a loose confederation of tribes or patriarchal communi- 
ties, each under a distinctive leader whose authority was abso- 
lute within the limits of his own tribal group.* Service under 
a chieftain was voluntary, the incentive being the booty that 
was divided equally among the members; and the obligation in- 
curred by membership was embodied in the oath of fidelity 
which each warrior took before the head of the tribe, whence 
the name fideles, applied to the members of the band.* In view 
of this oath, the individual warrior was bound to serve his 
master and lord with life and limb, to be feal and leal to him 
to the uttermost. In return, by way of sealing this mutual 
bond, the leader made the new warrior a present of either horse 
or armor. The compact thus formed was not necessarily life- 
long; the individual was at liberty to quit the service of the 
tribal chief, with the sole stipulation that he return the gift 
he had received upon admittance to the band.° 

The fideles in the service of the king were specially priv- 
ileged, and their services were of a more exacting nature. 
These men, antrustions, as they were called when in the service 
of the king, were bound by a like oath of fidelity, in the same 
manner as the fideles who served minor chieftains were sworn 
in allegiance to them. In similar fashion to the latter men, the 
king’s antrustions were liable to military service, both in de- 
fense of his domain, and in any expeditions he might under- 
take. But in addition to this service, the king’s antrustions 


$C. Bayet, Le monde germanique @ la fin du IV® siécle (Lavisse, 
Histoire de France, Il, partie I, chap. II, pp. 43-8). 

4The nature of this oath is indicated in the first century by Tacitus, 
Germania, XIV, ed. C. Halm, Leipzig, 1886: Cum ventum in aciem, 
turpe principi virtite vincl, turpe comitatus virtutem principis non adac- 
quare. Iam vero infame in omnem vita ac probrosum superstitem prin- 
cipt suo ex acie recessisse: illum defendere, twert, sua quoque fortia 
facta gloriae eius adsignare praeciprum sacramentum est: principes pro 
victoria pugnant, comites pro principt. 

5 Cf. Brunner, a legal historian of the first rank, Deutsche Rechts- 
geschichte, II, pp. 98, and 258-9, Leipzig, 1892; vol. I, 2d ed. 1906. 


sh 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


fulfilled various offices incident to the royal household, and 
were also employed as missi regis, i.e., representatives of the 
king entrusted with matters of civil and criminal procedure 
throughout the realm, notably with the duties of ambassador, 
and inspector of conditions in distant districts.° The exact 
extent of their privileges cannot be determined,’ but the dis- 
tinction accorded to them is evidenced by the fact that the 
murder indemnity, or Wergild, exacted for the death of any of 
their group was triple the amount demanded in the cas of an 
ordinary Frank. 


II 


A still more important recognition of the character of the 
antrustions is to be found in the benefice, which owes its first 
development to the exigencies arising out of the status of this 
privileged class. | 

A gradual change, far-reaching in result, had been infiltrated 
into the life of these Germanic tribes as a consequence of their 
definitive establishment in France. Prior to the occupation of 
Gaul the Franks had been a nomadic people, securing a liveli- 
hood in the pursuits of hunting and warfare. They came into 
France without any experience of the value of land in itself. 
Once settled there, they were confronted by a totally new and 
different state of affairs: their previous occupations in warfare 


6 Jbid., pp. cited supra. 

7 The Salic law provided that an antrustion need not testify against 
a fellow antrustion. Lex Salica, ed. Holder, Leipzig, 1880, p. 8o, tit. 
LXXVI, sec. 3: Si antrussio contra antrussionem testimonium turauerit, - 
sol. XV. culpabi. iudicetur. Towards the end of the Merovingian dyn- 
asty, the antrustions had become a privileged class of landowners: cf. 
Brunner, Rechtsgeschichte, Il, pp. 258 ff. 

8 Of real import in this connection is the formula for the acceptance, 
by the king, of an antrustion in the seventh century, which is as fol- 
lows: Rectum est ut qui nobis fidem pollicentur ,inlesam nostram 
tueantur auxilio. Et quia ille fidelis, Deo propitio, oster, veniens ibi 
in palatio nostro una cum arma sua, in manu nostr., trustem et fidelita- 
tem nobis visus est coniurasse, propterea per pracsentem praeceptum 
decernimus ac iubemus ut deinceps memoratus ille inter numero an- 
trustionorum conputetur, Et si quis fortasse eum interficere praesump- 
serit, noverit se virgildo suo solidis DC esse culpabilem indicetur. E. de 
Roziére, Recueil des Formules du V* au X° siécle, I, p. 3, no. VIII, 
Paris, 1859. . 


54 


HOMME-A-SEIGNEUR RELATION 


and as hunters were not by themselves a sufficient means of 
existence. The king no longer had at his disposal the spoils 
of war to divide among his followers as a means of assuring 
their faithfulness to himself. Since no taxes were levied,® the 
sole wealth of the crown lay in the territory acquired. And it 
was in the distribution of this land that the reward of service 
must be found. 

As a result of these increasingly prevalent conditions, the 
king’s gift of horse or armor to his antrustions was replaced 
by grants of tracts of land, known as benefices, in return for 
which his servants might support and equip themselves for 
service entailed in warfare. At the first, these benefices were 
intended to be revocable at the will of the king: they were 
not stipulated for more than the life-time of the holder. How- 
ever, the antrustion holding a benefice found himself immedi- 
ately more vitally involved in the welfare of his lord than be- 
fore the advent of this institution. He still had, indeed, the 
right to forego the king’s service, but he was required to make 
formal request for release therefrom—an appeal, nevertheless, 
that the king was expected to meet with favor. In such cases, 
the antrustion surrendered the benefice, just as under former 
conditions he had given back the armor received as a gift from 
his chieftain. The beneficiaries also acknowledged a more spe- 
cific jurisdiction of the king. They could not, without the royal 
permission, change from the state of laic to that of cleric,?° 
nor contract marriage, either for themselves or for their 
children.*? 


® Under the Merovingian kings the system of taxation established by 
the Romans gradually fell into disuse. Cf. Pfister, Gaul under the 
Merovingian Franks. Institutions. (Cambridge Medieval History, II, 
cane V, p. 139, ed. H. M. Gwatkin and J. P. Whitney, New York, 
1913. 

10 Ca. 627. Cf. Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, ed. 
Bouquet, III, V1, 562: Et quia praefatus vir Domini in ejus aula 
nutritus, et suis fuerat olim ministeriis adscitus, nitebatur ei consultu 
suorum molestiam inferre, pro eo quod sine ejus permissu habitum mu- 
tasset, ac monasticae se Religioni mancipasset. 

__ 11 For stipulations as to marriage ca. 622, cf. ibid., 606, n. 90, Ex vita 
S. Salabergae: Metuens autem praefatus Gundoinus ne ob filiam iram 
Regis saevitiam incurreret, eam a calle, quod ire sponte decreverat, 
pedetentim retraxit ... Mox praedictam Salabergam non ejus sponte 


55 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


In this epoch during which the mart became more subject 
to the king, there was a tendency on the part of the ruler to 
refrain from arbitrarily withdrawing the benefice from the 
man who held of him. The trend in this direction is first indi- 
cated by the Thirty Year Provision, granted by Chlotaire I in 
the year 560, whereby the king agreed not to withdraw any 
estate that had been held by one man for thirty years.1? This 
movement to strengthen the rights of the proprietor was con- 
firmed in the Treaty of Andelys in 587,'* and again by the 
Ordinance of Paris in 614.4 

As soon as it was definitely understood that the benefice was 
tenable for life, there naturally followed an effort on the part 
of the beneficiary to render his holding hereditary. This was 
gradually brought about, in one or another of four ways. I. A 
custom arose by which a beneficiary during his lifetime sought 
to assure to his heir the unbroken tenure of the paternal office 
and of the benefice attaching thereto ;?° the son was formally 
introduced at court, was associated with the father in the ful- 
fillment of the latter’s duties, and made every effort to succeed 
the father at his death. 

2. The king sometimes guaranteed to a favored official that 


. regio tamen jussu et ob liberorum procreandorum causam, prae- 
dictus vir ad suum adscivit conjugium. Cf. also ibid., 615, Ex vita S. 
Anstrudis, and ibid., 621, Ex vita S. Berthae. Cf. also Brunner, 
Rechtsgeschichte, II, p. 268. 

12 Monumenta Germanmae Historica, Leges, I, sec. 13, p. 3. Chlo- 
thachariu I, regis constitutio: Quicquid ecclesia, clerici, vel provinciales 
nostri, intercedente tamen justo possessionis initio, per triginta annos 
inconcusso jure possedisse probantur, in eorum ditione res possessa 
permaneat; nec actio taniis aevi spatius sepulta ulterius contra legum 
ordinem sub aliqua repetitione consurgat, possessione in possessoris 
aure sine dubio permanente. 

13 [bid., p. 6. Guntchrami et Childeberti regum pactum: Similiter 
quicquid antefati reges ecclesiis aut fidelibus suis contulerunt, aut 
adhuc conferre cum iustitia, Deo propitiante, voluerint, stabiliter con- 
servetur. 

14 [bid., sec. 16, p. 15. Clothacharii II Edictum anni 614: Quicquid 
parentes nostri aut anteriores principes vel nos per iustitiam visi sumus 
concessisse et confirmasse, in omnibus debeat confirmari. 

15 Under the Merovingians, women were not permitted to hold a 
benefice, by reason of the military service incident thereto. Cf. Pfister, 
Gaul under the Merovingian Franks. Institutions. (Cambridge Me- 
dieval History, Il, chap. v, p. 133.) 


56 


] 


HOMME-A-SEIGNEUR RELATION 


his heir should succeed to the function (honor) and also to the 
benefice of the father. 

3. During the decline of the Merovingians, still a third 
factor became effective. Officials of great power and prestige 
deliberately usurped the privilege of making their holdings 
hereditary. 

4. The ultimate factor in this movement was the con- 
version of allodial lands into benefices. From Roman times 
there had existed proprietors who held, independently of any 
suzerain, landed possessions which were regularly handed down 
from father to son. In the anarchy that accompanied the 
decline of the Merovingian power, it became increasingly diffi- 
cult for a small landowner to maintain himself in a state of 
unprotected isolation, and he saw himself compelled to sur- 
render his patrimonial lands to the king, and receiving them 
back again from this overlord, to hold them of him in the 
nature of a benefice. 

These allodial lands having been originally hereditary, and 
becoming converted into benefices with the opportunity for 
express agreement, continued for the most part hereditary, and 
by their nature superinduced a similar development in the case 
of other benefices. By the middle of the seventh century this 
trend was fairly well established, although the principle of 
hereditary succession cannot be said to have yet become fixed, 
since the hereditary character was still subject to exceptional 
concession, and was not applied by general rule. 

Thus it may be seen that from the era of the Frankish occu- 
pation of Gaul, there existed a personal relationship of homme- 
d-seigneur constantly increasing in strength, and emphasizing 
above all the bond between individuals associated through the 
obligations of fidelity and devotion. In this intercourse land 
played a secondary role, and “le premier rempart de l’autorité 
était la foi promise et la foi recue.”?¢ 


16 Montesquieu, De Vesprit des lois, Book XXXI, chap. xx, p. 518, 
in the Geuvres completes de Montesquieu, ed. Parelle, Paris, ae 


57 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


III 


Under the Roman empire there had existed a relationship 
of inferior to superior through the bond of patrocinium, a term 
summing up the two phases of the relationship: 1. the protec- 
tion given by a powerful to a weaker individual; 2. the author- 
ity of the protector over the protected. This same institution 
existed among the Gauls. Arising, as it did, out of the desti- 
tution and necessity of the client or one protected, it amounted 
to little less than slavery. Among the Franks a custom very 
similar to patrocinium held a considerable place in the life of 
the people. Commendation (as the Frankish counterpart of the 
Roman institution was called), during the first two centuries 
of the Frankish occupation of Gaul was little less arduous 
than patrocinium, as is shown by the formula of commendation, 
which ran about as follows: 


“To that magnificent lord so and so, I, so and so: Since it is well 
known to all how little I have wherewith to feed and clothe myself, 
I have therefore petitioned your generosity, and your goodwill has 
decreed to me, that I should hand myself over and commend myself 
to your protection, which I have accordingly done; that is to say, in 
the manner following: that you should aid and succor me with food 
and clothing, according as I shall be able to serve and merit of you. 
And as long as I live, I owe to do service and respect to you, suitably 
to my free condition; and I shall not during the time of my life have 
the ability to withdraw from your power or guardianship, but must 
remain always under your authority.”17 


17 Domino magnifico illo, ego enim ille. Dum et omnibus habetur 
percogmitum qualiter ego minime habeo unde me pascere vel vestire 
debeam, ideo peti pietati vestro, et mihi decrevit voluntas, ut me in 
vestrum mundoburdum tradere vel commendare deberem, quod ita et 
fect: eo wvidelicet modo ut me tam de victu quam et de vestimento, 
iuxta quod vobis servire et promereri potuero, adiuvare vel consolare 
debeas, et dum ego in capud advuixero, ingenuili ordine tibi servicium vel 
obsequium inpendere debeam, et de vestra potestate vel mundoburdo 
tempore vitae meae potestatem non habeam subtrahendi, nisi sub vestra 
potestate vel defensione diebus vitae meae debeam permanere. Unde 
convent ut, si unus ex nobis de has conventiis se emutare voluerit, 
solidos tantos pari suo conponat, et ipsa convenentia firma permaneat. 
(Unde convenit ut duas epistolas uno tenore conscriptas ex hoc inter se 
facere vel adfirmare deberent, quot ita et fecerunt. Roziére, I, no. 
XLITI. Commendatio. Formula is of the seventh century. Cf. 
formula in Magna Bibliotheca Veterum Patrum, ed. La Bigne, Paris, 
1646, XVI, sec. 44, p. 43. 


58 


HOMME-A-SEIGNEUR RELATION 


It is not to be assumed that the Frankish commendation had 
its origin in the Roman or Gallic prototype: its later develop- 
ment is certainly Germanic. There can be positively noted 
only the analogy of institutions arising under similar condi- 
tions of civil life. And further, it should be made quite clear 
that the conversion of allodial lands as such was in no sense 
commendation, but merely one relatively minor instance in 
which commendation was primarily employed. For commenda- 
tion implied no land tenure: in fact it involved ordinarily the 
contrary, being a personal, non-property contract. 

This practice of commendation during the following hun- 
dred years continued to develop. In the eighth century the 
term vassus or vassallus came to replace the older form 
antrustion or fidelis..* Under the date of the year 757 is re- 
corded the precise formula of the ceremony whereby a man 
commended himself: 

“Tbique Tassilo venit, dux Baioariorum, in vasatico se commendans 
per manus, sacramenta iuravit multa et innumerabilia, reliquias sanc- 
torum martyrum manus inponens, et fidelitatem promisit regi Pippino 
et supradictis filiis eius ... sic ut vassus recta mente et firma devo- 
tione per iustitiam, sicut vassus dominos suos, esse deberet.’’19 

The ceremonial of commendation included the reaching out 
of the folded hands of the freeman, manibus junctis se tradtt, 
in manibus (domini) se commendat, manus suas mittit inter 
manus domimi.*° ‘The vassal-to-be knelt before his future lord 
standing or sitting, extended his hands joined together, and 
placed them between the hands of the lord. The lord then asked 
him whether he wished to become his man, and the freeeman 
answered yes. As the final seal of the compact, the lord kissed 
the freeman upon the mouth. Following the act of commenda- 
tion, came the oath of fealty.? This oath?? demanded a full sur- 


18 Brunner, II, p. 261. 

19 Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptorum, 1, 140, Annales 
Laurissenses, anno 757. 

20 Brunner, II, p. 51, and II, p. 270. 

21 Tbid., Il, 272. 

22 Not to be confused with the common oath of fidelity exacted from 
all subjects on such occasions as the coronation of a new king or the 
acquiring of territory not previously under the king’s control. This 
form of oath fell into disuse during the period of the later Meroving- 
ians, but was revived by Charlemagne in 78. Cf. Brunner, II, p. 
58-59. 

59 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


render of the freeman, body and soul, and the express promise 
to maintain the king’s interests.* 

Thus far the question has been of the relation of the indi- 
vidual simply to the king. But commendation was by no means 
restricted to the crown. Originally, under the first race of 
French kings, personal relationship as it found expression in 
the benefice and commendation, was limited to the reciprocal 
compact of service and protection between subject and ruler. 
But after the principle of commendation was established among 
the Franks, there came an epoch when the decay of the Mer- 
ovingian power had so progressed that the protection of the 
king became of doubtful value, especially in distant parts of 
his realm. This weakening provided an occasion for the great 
nobles to usurp some part of the royal prerogatives. Such 
arrogation was manifested in the firmer grasp which the vas- 
sals of the king began to secure upon the benefices. Another 
result of this waning of the royal authority was the practice 
that grew up whereby the great vassals at length received men 
under their protection as commendati. The movement was 
furthered by the kings themselves, who failed to realize the 
significance of the danger with which they were threatened by 
the new system. 

As early as the sixth century, capitularies made it legal for 
the Franks to become vassals of the great lords of the king- 
dom,”* and under Charlemagne this was compulsory.” Thus 

23 Brunner, II, p. 58, and II, p. 267. 

24 Si quis ei, quem in patrocinio habuerit, arma dederit, vel aliquid 
donaverit, apud ipsum que sunt donata permaneat. Si vero alium sibit 
patronum elegerit, licentiam habeat cui se voluerit commendare, quo- 
mam ingenuo homim non potest prohibert, quiain sua potestate consistit ; 
sed reddat omnia patrono quem deseruit. This is of the end of the fifth 
century. Lex Wisig., lib. V, tit. III, sec. 1 (Forum Judicum, col. I, p. 
66, Madrid, 1815). And again, Stetit nobis de illis liberis hominibus 
Longobardis ut licentiam habeant se commendandi ubi voluerint, sicut 
in tempore Longobardorum fecerunt. Cap. Pipp. reg. Ital., a. 793 
(Baluzius, Capitularia regum Francorum, Parisiis, 1677, I, col. 537, sec. 
XIIT). Also, unusquisque liber homo, post mortem domini sui, licentiam 
habeat se commendandi inter haec tria regna ad quemcumque voluerit. 
Similiter et ille qui nondum alicui commendatus est. (Baluzius, a. 806, 
I, col. 443, sec. X). 


25 Ut nullus comparet caballum, bovem et jumentum, vel alia, nisi eum 
cognoscat qui eum vendidit, aut de quo pago est, vel ubi manet vel quis 


60 


HOMME-A-SEIGNEUR RELATION 


was vassalage, in its personal, homme-d-seigneur relationship, 
brought to fullest maturity under the Carolingians. 


IV 

With the custom of the great nobles receiving lesser men into 
personal relationship there naturally grew up the system of sub- 
infeudation, which resulted gradually in an ascending series 
of subsidiary tenures that culminated in the various great 
feudal lords. It continued to develop from the age when the 
benefices underwent those first strong definitive tendencies 
towards the hereditary nature that marked their transforma- 
tion into fiefs. The system was consummated during the 
tenth and eleventh centuries in a decentralized government, 
remained practically fixed during the twelfth century, and 
was finally resolved into the régime of absolute monarchy. 

The benefice became hereditary during the ninth century; 
the interworking of the hereditary benefice with the already 
completed system of personal vassalage and with the resultant 
sub-infeudation, shows the full ascendency of the feudal sys- 
tem at its height. Thereafter free alods dwindled almost to the 
vanishing point: commendation became homage, which was 
marked by the disappearance of the personal element and by 
the substitution of the agreement based solely on land pos- 
session and the increasing obligations attached thereto. The 
tenth century saw the last of the personal relationship without 
land consideration ;?° at this point the entire status of the re- 
lationship of man to man was altogether modified. Homage, 
displacing for all time personal commendation, was formulated 
thus: Devenio homo vester DE TENEMENTO, QUOD DE VOBIS 
est eius senior. Cap. Car. Mag. a. 806, Baluzius, I, col. 450, sec. 3. Cf. 
also Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Leges, I, p. 395, Conventus apud 
Marsnam, a. 847. Annuntiatio Karoli: Volumus etiam ut unusquisque 
liber homo in nostro regno seniorem, qualem voluerit, in nobis et in 
nostris fidelibus accipiat. Mandamus etiam ut nullus homo seniorem 
suum sine iusta ratione dimittat, nec aliquis eum recipiat, nisi sicut 
tempore antecessorum nostrorum consuetudo futt. 

26 Except isolated cases, constantly decreasing in number, such as 
the one Acher mentions, in Les Archaismes apparents dans la chan- 
son de Raoul de Cambrai (Revue des langues romanes, L, 1907, pp. 
237 ff.) 

61 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


TENEO, et fidem vobis portabo contra omnes gentes, salva fide 
debita Domino Regi et haeredibus sms.”?" 

Consideration of the function of the personal relationship 
of homme-d-seigneur as developed in feudal French history 
and as instanced in feudal French poetry, with a view to 
identify the coincidences in each of these two sources will be 
the attempt made in the remainder of this study. 

* * * 

The respective dates at which the extant poems were writ- 
ten in the form which has been handed down has been satis- 
factorily settled by the editors of the various manuscripts. This 
written stage was of course subsequent to the period of the 
actual historical events which the individual poems relate. The 
feudal poems, although they are not historical in all their 
details, have been connected, almost without exception, with 
historical events of different periods of early French history. 
This historical background incorporated in many of the poems 
proves that, wherever they bear traces of historicity, they 
may be assigned to definite periods betweeen the sixth and 
tenth centuries. 

These two different methods of dating the poetry, whether 
one starts from the period at which were written the manu- 
script copies now extant, or from the point of view of the 
relation of the events in actual history, have been employed 
exhaustively, and with excellent results. But given thus the 
historical basis for the poetry, and the fixation of date of the 


27 Cf. Du Cange, Glossarium, sub voce. The full ceremonial of feudal 
homage and investiture is found in Patrologiae Latinae, ed. J. P. 
Migne, Paris, 1854, CLXVI, col. 996, sec. 90 B. Vita et Martyrio Beati 
Caroli Boni Flandriae Comitis. This description, although relating to 
an incident in the twelfth century, is an accurate description as well 
of the ceremonial in the earliest feudal age. Primum hominium fece- 
runt ita: Comes requisivit, st integre vellet homo suus fieri; et ille re- 
spondit, Volo, et junctis manibus amplexatus a manibus comitis, osculo 
confoederati sunt. Secundo loco fidem dedit is qui hominium fecerat 
prolocutort comutis in ws verbis: Spondeo in fide mea me fidelem fore 
amodo comitt Willelmo, et sibi hominium integraliter contra omnes 
observaturum fide bona et sine dolo. Idemque super reliquias sanctorum 
tertio loco juravit. Deinde virgula, quam manu consul tenebat, investi- 
turas donavit eis omnibus qui hoc pacto securitatem et hominium simul- 
que juramentum fecerunt. 


62 


HOMME-A-SEIGNEUR RELATION 


extant manuscripts, there has not yet been solved the question 
as to the time at which these legends, more or less interwoven 
with historical material, first found their way into poetic form. 
The problem has been approximately solved, but always by an 
application of the two methods described above, with the single 
exception of Bédier’s epoch-making hypothesis as to the joint 
monastic and jongleuresque origin of the epic poetry. 

The writer has no intention to discuss here the theory em- 
bodied in the Légendes épiques of Bédier. It is proposed rather 
to throw upon this general question of the period of composi- 
tion of the poetry what light may be derived from a third 
method of analysis not hitherto brought into play to the extent 
it seems to deserve. 

In the content of French feudal poetry, aside from reference 
to actual historical events, there is a not inconsiderable mass 
of what may be termed custom-material. There is no need for 
any proof to be adduced that the people’s conception of any 
institution varies from one generation to another. The re- 
ligion of the fathers is ignorant superstition to the sons. The 
beliefs of the past are a source of amusement to the present. 
In the early middle ages, the expression of a writer was neces- 
sarily that of his own times and milieu to a far greater degree 
than in a subsequent age when freer access to historical sources 
obtained. It is justifiable then to consider the social life and 
institutions reflected in the feudal poems as virtually faithful 
portrayals of the age in which they were composed. 

There is, however, one difficulty arising at the outset; the 
poems, though individually written at definite periods, happen 
to have been revamped from time to time by writers of suc- 
cessive epochs who undertook to modernize them. They can- 
not then be said to retain intact the whole spirit and intent 
of the earlier or original composition. This is evident as re- 
gards the confused, almost obliterated reflection of historical 
events in the subsequent redactions. It is equally true of the 
customs and sundry phases of feudal life revealed in the 
poetry. On the other hand, these historical events, though 
distorted, are still recognizable in the later poetry; so also 

63 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


some of the primitive social manners are retained in the poems 
that hark back to the age of the early composition, albeit in 
the extant form they are obscured by the revision of redactors 
unfamiliar with the milieu of the original of many years 
before. 

Attention will be paid in other parts of this work to certain 
of these customs pertaining to the domestic and the religious 
life of the subjects of feudal France. The study at present is 
to be confined to the single institution of the relationship of 
homme-d-seigneur, as evidenced in the poems. This institu- 
tion, as outlined above in its historical phases, finds a marked 
parallel in the poetry. , 

The Roman de Floovant, though dating back in its present 
form only to the second half of the twelfth century,”® is re- 
lated by historical association to Clovis and the time of the 
Merovingians. From this viewpoint, it is, therefore, the oldest 
of all French epic poetry, and is to be considered as distinctly 
pre-feudal. The existence and the emphasizing of a non- 
property relation of homme-d-seigneur is then to be expected 
and the presence of it goes not a little way to prove the primi- 
tive character of the poem. The whole trend of the poem in- 
volves the fealty of a vassal to his lord, and the property com- 
pact is conspicuous by its absence. 

Floovant, as the story runs, is son of the emperor Clovis, 
and has been placed under the ban of the kingdom for seven 

28 An example of a very primitive custom retained in the poetry is 
the saddle-bearing episode in Raoul de Cambrai, 1770 ff., where Raoul, 
having insulted Bernier, offers to make amends by travelling the public 
highway carrying Bernier’s saddle upon his back, and saying to each 
person whom he encounters, “Behold Bernier’s saddle (Veiz ci la B. 
cele).” The earliest known example of this custom is found in a capi- 
tulary of Louis II, in the year 866 (Monumenta Germaniae Historica, 
Capitularia, II, p. 96). Cf. Grimm, Deutsche Rechtsalterthiimer, 4th 
ed., Leipzig, 1899, II, pp. 312ff. Another such very ancient custom 
is the form of oath in Raoul de Cambrai, 3017, Terre ne erbe ne te 
puet atenir. Cf. Grimm, I, pp. 154 ff., and Settegast, Erde und Gras 
als Rechtssymbol im Raoul de Cambrai (Zeitschrift fiir romanische 
Philologie, XXXI, 1907, pp. 588 ff.). 

29 Petit de Julleville, Histoire de la langue et de la littérature fran- 


¢aise des origines a 1900, I, p. 101, Paris, 1896-1899. Cf. Rajna, Origini 
dell’ epopea francese, pp. 133 ff., Firenze, 1884. 


64 


HOMME-A-SEIGNEUR RELATION 


years. His esquire, Richier, returning to the city and finding 
his master gone, swears that for no man under heaven will he 
be deterred from following his lord.*®° 

“Surely, says Richier, I would not fail him even were my 
limbs severed from me.’ And he sets out at once after his 
master, overtaking him at the moment when Floovant has been 
captured by Saracens, from whom he rescues him. Together 
they enter the service of King Flores, who is at war with the 
Saracens. | 

One fact that stands out in this episode is that the position 
of Richier is not that of an esquire of the later age of Chivalry. 
Floovant, during the siege of a walled city, finds relief from 
the stress of battle in chatting with a maiden who is watching 
the conflict from the tower above. Richier comes up to rebuke 
his master: 


“You play the recreant, when you talk idly here. Go into her cham- 
ber to converse with her more intimately. Her safe-conduct would not 
be worth a farthing if the Saracens found you; you would lose your 
head. Come now, wretched knave, you may well deem yourself of 
little worth, for you do leave off slaying the pagans, and seeking re- 
nown and glory. You were driven from France by reason of your 
base despite; so you have neither silver nor steed nor charger, if you 
win them not by iron and steel! Ah! Floovant, you are right fair at 
speech, but for nought have you arms and a war-horse. Your body is 
fair, and your face is comely; through love of this lady you will gain 
more than great wealth! Oh, unworthy king, never were you of royal 
blood, if you have not rich mantles, charger and palfrey, and you win 
them not with the sword of Vienne!’’2 


And Floovant accepts the rebuke humbly: “Richier,” says 
Floovant, “thanks, for God’s sake. I will do it no more, now 
pardon me.”’*? 

Such an episode is precisely what might have been expected 
between a chieftain and a man bound to him by no other than 
personal ties, and illustrates too the duty and privilege of the 
man in the pre-feudal age to advise his master in all matters 
pertaining to his welfare.** 


30 Floovant, vv. 186-188. 

31 Tbid., 197. 

82 Tbid., 451-467. 

83 Tbid., 468-469. 

34 Cf. Brunner, I, p. 190, and II, pp. 258 ff. 
65 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


A short time after this, Floovant is made prisoner by the 
paynim infidels. Flores’ armies return home defeated, but 
they console themselves with a banquet. Others might feast, 
but not Richier: 


Rather does he have his bed made, and goes to lie down thereon. 
But sleep he cannot, though his limbs were severed from him. And 
he weeps and laments his rightful lord: “Ah! by an evil fate came 
you here, noble warrior. Now go I into France, grieved and wrathful, 
a pelt on my neck like any beggar. And to meet me will come dukes 
and counts and princes, and ladies and maidens, and the proud emperor 
himself will ask news of his son whom he holds so dear. Alas, what 
can I say as to where I have abandoned him? It will never be believed 
that I have not slain him treacherously. But by the apostle John whom 
Christ loved, rather will I take many a heavy blow than that I should 
not find Floovant, my lord.’’35 


Then Richier rises and boots himself, clothes himself in 
hauberk, laces on his helm, hangs his shield about his neck, 
and takes congé, and goes forth to save his lord by a perilous 
venture.** At the moment of Richier’s coming, Floovant is a 
prisoner of the Saracens. Richier gains access to the dungeon, 
and meets a gaoler coming out, who remarks laughingly : 

“Hear now of this Frenchman! I have beaten him so well that he 
will never have need of aught in all his life.’ When Richier hears this, 
almost does the blood burst from his veins, then he says between his 
teeth, so that the other does not hear, “Thou filthy, ill-kept, ill-born, 
treacherous knave, for the love of my master shalt lose thy head.” And 
he drew his keen sword from his left side, and smote the heathen 


pagan such a grievous blow that he split him in twain down to the 
very navel.37 


When Richier comes rushing into the prison cell, Floovant 
thinks it is the gaoler returned to beat him again; and he 
seizes a cudgel that lies on the floor, and makes as if to strike 
Richier. 

“Stop!” cries Richier, “I am Richier, thy faithful friend, bound to 
thee by tribal ties, and am come to aid thee against the Saracens.” And 

35 Floovant, 921-935. 

86 Tbid., 936-939. 

37 [bid., 1291-1299. 


66 


HOMME-A-SEIGNEUR RELATION 


when Floovant hears him, exceeding great joy has he thereat: by rea- 
son of the happiness that he has thereof is he right merry.®8 

This scene recalls the friendship of Amis and Amiles in the 
thirteenth century poem of Oriental tradition, the vital differ- 
ence between them being that the tie uniting Amis and Amiles 
is the sworn bond of the lifelong friendship of equals. The 
union of these proverbial comrades is based upon mutual 
affection and equality, recognized and consecrated by a cere- 
mony religious and superstitions in nature :*® whereas the rela- 
tionship existing between Richier and Floovant is a tangible 
expression of the relation of homme-d-seigneur, bound by the 
ties of devotion and duty, and in actual fact, was perhaps the 
most conspicuous institution of that system of government 
which, originating with the Merovingians, was brought to full 
completion under the Carolingians. 

After Floovant, the next poem worthy of note, in chrono- 
logical order, is the Couronnement de Louis, which, preserved 
in manuscript of the thirteeenth century, is related to events 
in the ninth and tenth centuries. The notable feature about 
this poem is the diverse character of its composition, made 
up as it is of not less than five separate poems, with the result 
that unity of action is entirely lacking. The one element re- 
tained unimpaired throughout is the theme of the purely non- 
property relationship of Guillaume au cort nez to his lord, King 
Louis. It is remarkable that in a poem so broken and uncon- 
nected in episode, there should remain perfectly preserved this 
predominating theme, the exemplification of the relation of the 
non-property vassal to his lord. The expression of this pre- 
feudal idea of personal loyalty is the sole and at the same time 
sufficient reason for the grouping together here of the series 
of unrelated and extraneous incidents. 


38 Tbid., 1318-1321. 

89 The ceremonial details are not given in the poem; only the oath 
of comradeship is mentioned. The mystic and religious nature of the 
compact is indicated, however, by preceding statements of the Divine 
Will through which Amis and Amiles were predestined to this rela- 
tionship. More explicit details are not to be expected in the poetry, 
which being of popular rather than learned origin, could reproduce 
only vaguely an institution that had no roots in French soil. Cf. the 
following chapter of this work. 


67 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


The Couronnement de Louis, receiving its name from the 
first episode of the composite recital, is the exposition in nar- 
rative form of the fealty of Guillaume au cort nez to the 
Emperor Charles and his son Louis. In the opening scene, 
Charles, now well advanced in years, decides to give the crown 
to his son Louis. But his purpose is about to be thwarted, 
when Guillaume enters abruptly and with a terrible blow of 
his mailed fist slays outright the treacherous baron who op- 
poses the king’s will. Then the Count, seeing the crown rest- 
ing upon the altar, seizes it without delay, comes to the young 
prince, and places it upon his head. “Take this, my lord, and 
may God grant you strength to be a righteous lawgiver.”*° 

Guillaume then makes a successful expedition into Italy, 
and at the close of the campaign is about to take a wife, when 
from France come messengers who bring bitter news. They 
tell that King Charles is dead, and the regions of the realm — 
are fallen to Louis. But the traitors wish to make the son of 
Richard of Roen their king.** 

Then Guillaume abandons his bride, and hastens back to 
defend his lord. 


Three whole years is Guillaume the valiant in Poitou, conquering the 
land. And there is no day so sacred, neither Easter, nor Noél, nor 
yet All Saints’ Day that ought to be observed, that Guillaume has not 
his steel helmet shut to, girded on his sword, armed upon his horse. 
Great pain the baron suffers to maintain and defend his lord.4? 

The rebellion put down, once again Guillaume makes an 
expedition into Italy, only to be summoned forthwith to the 
aid of King Louis. Guillaume asks advice of his nephew 
Bertran: 

“Fair nephew, hear me. For God’s sake what counsel do you give 
me? The king, my lord, is altogether disinherited.”4 

Then Bertrand, wearied at last of the king’s ever-recurring 
demands, replies 

“Well, let him be. Let us abandon France, and commend it to the 

40 Couronnement de Louis, 142-146. 

41 Tbid., 1432-1440. 


42 Tbid,, 2011-2019. 
43 Tbid., 2659-2661. 


HOMME-A-SEIGNEUR RELATION 


devil, and with it this king who is such an ass. Never will he hold a 
square foot of his inheritance.”’44 

But the deep-rooted principle of fealty overcomes Guil- 
laume’s impatience, and his final decision is: 

“Let us drop the discussion. In the service of the king I wish to 
spend my youth and strength.”45 
The value of this poem, le Couronnement de Louis, as por- 
traying the personal relationship strictly of homme-d-seigneur 
on a non-property compact may, however, be subject to ques- 
tion, by reason of the fact that this is not a portrayal of an 
ordinary lord and his vassals, but of the king and his great 
lords. The idea of personal fealty is nevertheless predomi- 
nant, and its conception belongs to a period prior to the full 
development of feudalism. The Couronnement de Louis, says 
Gautier, is, together with the Roland, the most anti-feudal of 
all the chansons de geste. In it the ideas of nationality and 
patriotism are fully developed. And generally the older a 
_ chanson is, the more truly French or national it is.47 The reason 
for this is obvious in that as soon as feudalism had broken up 
the power of the king, all idea of national loyalty, centered as 
it was in the very person of the king, disappeared, and the 
only allegiance known subsequently was that of a man to a 
lord from whom he held land. Thus the Couronnement de 
Louis appears to be a poem originally composed in its diverse 
parts soon after the time of the historic events with which it 
deals. It is later in composition than the Floovant, yet evi- 
dently pre-feudal in conception.*® 

A very pointed example of personal devotion is found in 
the Gormund et [sembard.*® The manuscript of this chanson 
is of the thirteenth century, whereas the material is related to 


44 Tbid., 2662-2665. 

45 Tbid., 2660-2667. . | 

46 [_, Gautier, Lidée politique dans ee chansons de geste, in Revue — 
des questions historiques, VIII, p. 109, Paris, 1860. 

47 [bid. 

48 Cf, Darmesteter, De Floovante, especially Pars III, cap. unicum, 
Paris, 1877. 

49 Gormont et Isembart, ed. Bayot, Paris, 1914. 


69 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


events which took place under Louis III, in the year 881.°° 
The unique manuscript of this poem, however, is fragmentary 
and mutilated. In the extant text, the relation of Gormund 
and Isembard is purely a personal and non-property one, but 
the version of the chanson as preserved is too incomplete to 
warrant such a conclusion without further data. External evi- 
dence, however, shows that Isembard was a French warrior 
who was compelled to flee from France, and took service 
with King Gormund, who later invaded France.** 

Isembard then served Gormund not as a consequence of 
any property obligation, but rather as the result of a voluntary 
and personal compact of service in return for protection. And 
the devotion of Isembard may properly be taken as expressing 
something of that primitive homme-d-seigneur relationship 
that in the ninth and tenth centuries showed signs of disappear- 
ing definitively. 

Both the beginning and the end of this chanson de geste are 
missing. The fragment opens with a mighty battle between 
the forces of King Louis and King Gormund. In this conflict 
Louis is victorious and slays Gormund. The first notable 
scene follows when Isembard finds the body of his dead lord 
and king. 


“Behold you Isembard riding down the lane. Now he sees Gormund 
in the meadow slain, prostrate, bleeding, mouth gaping wide. And 
Isembard well-nigh swoons of grief; hear ye his lament: “Ah! king 
and emperor, many a time have I told you in your own country that 
the French are hardy warriors; never was man born of woman who 
might wrest any land from them. Ah, Gormund, my king, my emperor, 
how noble was your visage, and how fair and ruddy! How stained now 
and changed! Louis, worthy emperor, you have served France well 
today, and Gormund has paid dear therefor. But, before God, I will 
never desert his cause so long as I can gird on sword.’’52 


And the desire for revenge, which was, after fealty, the 


50 Fragment de Gormund et Isembard, ed. R. Heiligbrodt, p. 505 
(Romanische Studien, ed. E. Boehmer, Strassburg, 1878, III, pp. sor- 


A. 
51 [bid., pp. 502-505. Cf. also F. Lot, Gormund et Isembard (Romania, 
XXVII, 1808, pp. I-50). 
52 Gormont et Isembart, vv. 464-488. 


70 


HOMME-A-SEIGNEUR RELATION 


supreme motive of this primitive age, asserts itself. Isembard 
looks about at the fleeing warriors, and cries out: 

“Whither flee ye, people, gone astray without a lord in any country? 
Turn back upon your course and let us avenge our emperor !’53 

This is a most noteworthy appeal; their king is dead, the 
cause is lost, and the sole hope is escape by flight. Neverthe- 
less, they rally, only to lose heart. Soon again the pagans flee 
away every one, and Isembard alone is left.°* And although 
alone, Isembard fights fearless to the last, and dies unwaver- 
ing in his devotion to his lord. 

The three poems thus far considered have illustrated to a 
fair degree of precision the fealty and personal devotion that 
existed before feudalism had achieved the task of establishing 
property tenure, and the inter-relation of property rights as 
the one prime factor of French political and social life. In 
these poems it has been noted that the property consideration 
is entirely absent, but the demonstration of the point in this 
investigation is not quite complete as yet. Each one of these 
poems shows a distinctive and different obstacle hindering a 
clear depiction and comprehension of the ideal relation: in the 
Floovant, the portrayal is marred by a constant intrusion of 
roman daventure elements, undoubtedly due to later treatment, 
but not easily to be distinguished in all cases from the primitive 
parts of the poem. The Cowronnement de Louis contains too 
many royalist features to be regarded as characteristic of a 
pure homme-d-seigneur relationship. What is extant of the 
Gormund et Isembard comes nearer the mark, but is, after all, 
too fragmentary, except for purposes of partial illustration. 

There is, however, one other poem of this type that has 
been preserved, and in it are discoverable all the phases of this 
relation suggested in the three just discussed; and further- 
more, none of the obscuring elements of the other poems men- 
tioned mars to any considerable degree the development of the 
theme of the homme-d-seigneur relation in this last, namely, 
the Raoul de Cambrai. 

53 Tbid., 490-493. 

54 Tbid., 613-614. 

71 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


The chanson of Raoul de Cambrai is preserved in a single 
manuscript®® of the last half of the twelfth century.°° The 
main action of the epic has been connected, however, with 
events of the year 943.°" 

The story of the Raoul de Cambrai is known well enough 
not to require a detailed analysis. A few words will therefore 
suffice by way of summary. 

During the days of his minority, Raoul de Cambrai is bereft 
of his paternal fief by King Louis. Having arrived at the age 
of manhood, he demands from King Louis the return of the 
fief. Louis compromises, and assures to Raoul the land of 
whatever baron of the realm shall thereafter be the first to 
die. It is to be understood that Louis means this to apply only 
in the case of a baron leaving no heirs. But subsequently, 
when Herbert, Count of Vermandois, dies, leaving four sons, 
Raoul holds the king to the letter of his promise, demands the 
Vermandois, and is granted this fief on condition that he can 
seize and hold it by force. Raoul invades the Vermandois and 
burns a convent where Marsent, mother of his esquire Bernier 
(who is a natural son of Marsent and Ybert of Vermandois) 
perishes in the flames. Bernier thereupon becomes bitterly 
angry with his master over this misdeed, and receiving a savage 
blow at his hands, deserts Raoul, and later slays Raoul in bat- 
tle. After a long lapse of time, when apparent peace has been 
restored between the two families, Guerri, uncle of Raoul, 
avenges his nephew by treacherously slaying Bernier. 

From one point of view, this epic centers upon the death of 


55 There are in addition the following fragments: first, some 250 
lines of a manuscript now lost, which were copied by the président 
Fauchet in the sixteenth century. Secondly, two fragments published 
in 1906 by Bayot (Revue des Bibliothéques et archives de Belgique): 
the first fragment contains verses 1-105, and 847-980; the second gives 
a continuation of the Raoul, identifying it with the legend of Gormund 
et Isembard: Pour ceste guerre passerent Sarrazin /Auvwec Gourmont, 
le riche barbarin, /Par le conseil Ysembart le meschin /Que Loeys 
en fist aler frarin. /Cis Ysembart estoit germain cousin Raoul Venfant 
celui de Cambresin. This linking of the legend of Raoul de Cambrai 
with Gormund et Isembard is found also in Philippe de Mouskes, 
Chronique rimée, 14030 ff. 

56 Petit de Julleville, I, p. 106. 

57 Raoul de Cambrai, pp. xv ff. 


72 


HOMME-A-SEIGNEUR RELATION 


Raoul, with the attendant vengeance exacted therefor by 
Guerri. But the poem presents even greater unity of plot and 
a far more clearly developed theme, if Bernier and not Raoul 
is regarded as the central figure of the poem. Certainly, with 
the possible exception of Raoul, Bernier ought to be so con- 
sidered, when it is seen that Raoul disappears completely from 
the narrative after line 3721, just about midway in the story. 
Bernier is the ideal type of liegeman in the primitive feudalism 
of the tenth century, as contrasted with the period of chivalry 
represented in the Court Epic of the thirteenth century. At the 
very outset, in Raoul de Cambrai, Bernier is shown united by 
ties of fealty to Raoul, but beholden to him by no other 
consideration than that he has voluntarily entered Raoul’s ser- 
vice, receiving his food and raiment from him, and also has 
been dubbed by him as his knight. Of paramount importance 
in this connection is the fact that the poet in no way refers to 
Bernier as holding any fief of Raoul, or property of any sort. 

The strictly personal nature of this bond between Raoul and 
Bernier is evidenced by the words of Ybert to his son Bernier 
when the latter, after renouncing the service of Raoul as a 
result of their quarrel over the burning of Marsent, returns 
home: 

“So long as you were a boy under my guardianship,’ says Ybert, 
“we nourished you in lordly fashion And when you became of age, 
you deserted us by reason of your egregious folly. You believed the 
flattery of Raoul, and betook yourself straight to Cambrai. You have 
served Raoul, and he has done you kindness.”58 

Likewise, before Raoul fulfills his threat to invade Ver- 
mandois, his mother asks: 

“Just tell me what will become of Bernier now that you have 
nourished him until you have made him a knight?”59 

Bernier is thus under obligations to Raoul only through 
personal gratitude for sundry favers, not for any property 
consideration. How inviolable that primitive bond was, is the 

real theme of the chanson. 
58 Tbid., vv. 1873-1879. 
59 Tbid., 1077-1078. 
73 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


Just as Raoul is about to invade the Vermandois, ancestral 
possession of the kinsmen of Bernier, the young esquire makes 
this protest: 

“I am your liegeman, that I deny not. But for my part I do not 
advise you to take their lands, for I know right well that they have the 
assistance of Ernaut de Doai: in no land have I beheld such warriors. 
Seek to come to terms with them before you do them aught of 
harm,’’60 

The notable feature of this warning is that it is prefaced by 
Bernier’s express avowal “J am your liegeman (Je sua vostre 
hom, ja nel vos celerat).” 

Raoul proceeds to lay waste the Vermandois, 
and Bernier is gloomy and thoughtful when he sees the lands of his 
father and his friends thus burned; and he almost dies with wrath. 
Wherever they go, Bernier always delays, and is in no haste to arm 
himself.61 

But although in this attack upon the Vermandois, Bernier 
strives to avoid taking an active part against his own father, 
the idea of deserting Raoul never occurs to Bernier. The bond 
of homage and fealty in this case is stronger than the ties of 
son to father—a situation in early feudal life which served the 
poet as his sole and all-inspiring theme. 

Not long thereafter Bernier meets with his mother and talks 
with her about the designs Raoul has upon the Vermandois. 
She reminds him that he is his father’s only son, and will in- 
herit his father’s possessions if he goes over to his side in 
defense of the domains of his ancestors. The words here given 
in answer by Bernier, and those that follow from his mother 
are in themselves an epitome of the entire poem and a reflec- 
tion of early feudal standards. 

Then says Bernier, “By Saint Thomas I swear I would not do it 
for the fief of Baudas. Raoul my lord is more wicked than Judas. 
But he is my lord; he gives me horse and armor, and cloths and silken 
stuffs. I would not fail him for the fief of Damas, until everyone 
says, “Bernier, you are right.’’6 


And the mother replies: “Son, by my faith, you are right. Serve 
your lord, you will gain God thereby.” 


60 [bid., 934-939. 
61 [bid., 1224-1228. 
62 [bid., 1379-1387. 


74 


HOMME-A-SEIGNEUR RELATION 


Stronger than any blood relationship, this bond of homme-a- 
seigneur was beyond every material consideration. In the 
events of the poem, a climax of crude dramatic sort is 
reached when Raoul sets fire to the monastery of Origny; 
when death comes to Bernier’s mother, Marsent, in the ensuing 
conflagration. Bernier is driven well-nigh to the limit of his 
endurance by this cruel deed, and reproaches Raoul, though 
with a certain restraint even at this point, while solemnly 
acknowledging the continuance of his position as liegeman of 
Raoul. 

“Raoul, fair lord, says Bernier, you do much that is praiseworthy, 
but on the other hand you do much that is worthy of blame... . I 
am your liegeman, nor do I seek to hide it; but you have rendered me 
evil reward for my services. You burnt my mother there within that 
monastery, and from death there is no recovery. But now you wish to 
destroy my father and my uncles! It is no marvel if I begin to be 
angry.’’63 

Raoul retorts by picking up a fragment of a broken spear, 
and striking Bernier. This act of personal violence proves 
enough to abolish every hitherto recognized bond. Bernier 
renounces his allegiance to Raoul, and starts off forthwith to- 
wards his father’s camp, which is pitched under Saint-Quentin. 
A great battle follows, in the midst of which Raoul and Bernier 
meet. Bernier finds himself no longer beholden to Raoul in 
any wise, yet his years of personal service recur to his mind, 
and he begins to reflect on whether he has not, even now, too 
easily forsworn his lord’s service, with the result that after 
reciting his grievances he ends by seeking peace of Raoul: 

“Ah, Raoul, my lord, son of a noble mother, I cannot forget that 
you dubbed me knight. But a heavy price have you since then made me 
pay.... You burnt my mother in the monastery of Origny, and my 
head you broke with your spear. I cannot deny that you offered me 
amend, but I was angered when I saw my blood flow. If now again 
you offer it to me, I will not refuse it, but will pardon all.”64 

Raoul answers with a basely insulting refusal, and in the 
fight that follows Bernier kills him. Even when forced in self 

63 [bid., 1638-1640. 

64 Tbid., 3055-3070. 

75 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 
defense to slay his erstwhile master, Bernier ponders with deep 
regret over the deed: “Of this, so help me God, it grieves me, 
that I have slain Raoul, but I have done tt within my right.”® 

After the death of Raoul the war between the factions of 
Vermandois and Cambrésis drags on for a time, but at length 
the two families are reconciled and Bernier takes in marriage, 
as a sequel of good omen to the feud, the daughter of Guerri, 
Raoul’s uncle. Meanwhile the death of Raoul seems to have 
been forgotten. 

One day Bernier and Guerri happen to be journeying to- 
gether on their return from a pilgrimage. Approaching once 
more the place of the great battle where Raoul was slain afore- 
time, Bernier remembers it all keenly, and sighs. Guerri 
straightway inquires of him what his trouble is. Bernier at 
first keeps silent, but yields finally to the insistence of his aged 
kinsman. 3 

“T will tell you,’ Bernier replies, “though it grieves me that it so 
pleases you. I am reminded of the noble Raoul, who took such pride 
upon himself that he thought to deprive four counts of their heritage. 
See here the very spot where I slew him.’6é 

The memories thus unfortunately recalled awaken in the old 
man all the passion of a desire for revenge that has long been 
denied. He gives no sign of his thought, but when the two 
stop near a brook to give water to their steeds, Guerri all 
unawares loosens one of the stirrups from his saddle and sud- 
denly smites Bernier upon the head, dealing him his death- 
blow. 


With reference to the subject of medieval civil administra- 
tion, a relationship of inferior to superior like that of Bernier 
to Raoul was possible as late as the twelfth century ;*” but the 
actual period of the general prevalence of this relation of 
homme-da-seigneur ended with the tenth century. Subsequently 
the status existed merely as a legal survival. And whatever 
may be said as to the connection of historical events with the 

65 Tbid., 3163-3164. 

66 Tbid., 8379-8384. 


87'There has been noted the single example adduced by Acher: cf. 
supra, p. 61, note 26. 
76 


€ 


HOMME-A-SEIGNEUR RELATION 


episodes related in Raoul de Cambrai, the social phases repro- 
duced therein, and the attitude of the poet toward such matters, 
reflect beyond question the period of the original conception 
of the poem. From this point of view, therefore, the highest 
probability is that the chanson of Raoul de Cambrai, or that — 
part of it which constitutes the primitive nucleus, came into 
existence not later than the end of the tenth century.*® 

On the side of history, the personal non-property relation- 
ship of homme-d-seigneur has been presented in this chapter 
with the purpose of demonstrating the growth and progress 
of this relationship from the sixth to the ninth century. Dur- 
ing those four centuries the benefice originated, developed, and 
was at length transformed into the fief. It has been shown also 
that by the tenth century the fief had entirely displaced the 
benefice, and the land-tenure contract had in the same time 
supplanted the personal non-property relationship. In the 
consideration of the social and political conditions reflected by 
Old French poetry, four chansons de geste have been analysed ; 
(1) the Floovant, of the middle of the ninth century, evidently 
prior to the appearance of the property element in the vassal 
to lord contract, as is shown by the similar status of the actual 
institution in history at that time; (2) the Couwronnemeni de 
Louis, and (3) the Gormund et Isembard, in the last half of the 
ninth century, when the personal domination of Charlemagne 
and his son Louis had resulted in the highest development of 
the personal relationship of homme-d-seigneur; and (4) the 
Raoul de Cambrai, of the tenth century, which resumes and 
preserves the record of the institution of personal fealty to a 
degree not discoverable in any other early Romance monument, 
nor in any of the historical sources of the pre-feudal period. 


68 Cf, Suchier and Birch-Hirschfeld, Geschichte der franzdsischen lit- 
teratur, Leipzig and Vienna, 1900, pp. 48 ff. Note however the error of 
accrediting the composition of Raoul de Cambrai to Bertolais. 


77 


CAR have 


PHASES OF FEUDAL CUSTOM IN FRENCH EPIC 
POETRY 


I 


The period beginning with the accession to the throne of 
Hugues Capet, in the year 987, and ending with the advent, in 
1226, of the reign of Saint Louis, saw the completest internal 
activity of the forces of feudalism in France.1 This feudal 
organization of France, at the acme of its development in the 
eleventh and twelfth centuries, was based primarily upon land- 
tenure. But the weakening of the central government which 
had made inevitable the infinite parcelling of land, had at the 
same time brought other vital consequences. 

First of all, this very parcelling of the land, by the induce- 
ment that it offered every noble to aggrandize his fief, resulted 
in a constant appeal to force of arms, since the central govern- 
ment lacked the power to maintain an equitable division, even 
had it so desired. And, arising directly from the inability of 
the king to assure protection as well as from the land tenure 
system, resulted that status of the individual so peculiar to 
the feudal period. 

In this chapter, the effort is made to explain and to illus- 
trate, from historical sources and from poetry, certain of the 
customs of the age bearing upon this status of the individual, 
and the part that force played in the life of the people. Next 
to the sub-infeudation of land, these two conceptions were the 
outstanding features of the full maturity of feudalism.” 

1For an authoritative survey of this period, cf. Molinier, Etude sur 
Padminmistration féodale dans le Languedoc (Histoire générale de 
Languedoc, Devic and Vaissete, VII, pp. 132 ff., Toulouse, 1879). 


2 Seignobos, Régime féodal, especially 52-61 (Lavisse and Rambaud, 
Histoire générale, II, pp. 1 ff., Paris, 1903). 


78 


PHASES OF FEUDAL CUSTOM 


In France, at least, the first of these elements involved the 
position of each individual, regulated and conditioned by some 
one above him and definitely related to others beneath him; but 
a status and relationship based in each instance upon the tenure 
of lands of greater or less value and power, and upon the in- 
terdependence of these lands according to their military 
strength. 

This interdependence must be taken in a restricted meaning, 
for the reason that it was never the mutual support of equals, 
upon the same level, but of inferior and superior, in an as- 
cending series. Two men might have been apparently equal 
when there was no intercourse of one with the other; brought 
into contact, one of them became inevitably subject to the 
other. 

What appears on the surface to be a direct and valid argu- 
ment refuting the existence of the system outlined above has 
been elaborated by Flach in his article entitled Compagnonnage 
dans les chansons de geste, a study first appearing in Les 
Etudes romanes dédiées a Gaston Paris.* This article was 
incorporated in 1893 in the second volume of Flach’s work 
entitled Les Origines de l'ancienne France, in which the origi- 
nal study is somewhat amplified, but not changed in any con- 
siderable measure.* This essay of Flach, a very eminent 
authority in matters of early French history, ought not to be 
overlooked, because of a certain confusion that might arise out 
of a present-day and somewhat common misconception. 

It is not intended here to take up the question in detail. 
Such a study would furnish of itself material enough for an 
exhaustive investigation. Nor is there intended any detailed 
criticism of Flach’s most scholarly article. An analysis of his 
work need go only so far as is necessary to prevent, in regard 
to the matters here discussed, any errors involved in a too 
hasty evaluation or exaggeration of that part of Flach’s work 
bearing upon the homme-d-seigneur relation. 


8 Paris, 1891, pp. 141-180. 
4J. Flach, Les Ovrigines de Vancienne France, II, pp. 427-490, Paris, 
1893. 


79 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


The title of the study, Compagnonnage, Flach has not de- 
fined. The word does not occur in the chansons de geste nor 
elsewhere in early French writings, either prose or verse. 
The modern connotation is of course inapplicable. Whatever 
explanation Flach may urge as to the use of the word must be 
found in the context of his own work. The text of the article 
in question shows that he invests this vocable with several 
meanings, diverse and unrelated. 

In the first division of his theme, Le Comitat germain,’ the 
term expresses the relation of a Germanic chieftain to the 
warriors under him, whether his authority be derived by in- 
heritance, or whether it accrue from the voluntary submission 
to his leadership. And in this part of the discussion, the rela- 
tion existing between the chieftain and the foremost of his 
watriors is called by the author compagnonnage. In the next 
division,® compagnonnage is applied to the blood-brotherhood 
inherent among the primitive Scandinavians, a relationship 
having as its basis the transfusion of blood between two or 
more men who participated in certain pagan rites or other 
forms of blood-covenant common to many primitive peoples, 
and which survives to this day among the Arabs.? But this 
practice has never obtained in the history of France, if the 
sources can be depended upon. And there is no historic 
mention of it among the Germanic tribes since the first century 
BG | 

Incidentally, it may be adduced that if Flach in his article 
means to imply that the rite itself, or the tradition of it, came 
into France through outside agencies, more emphasis might 
well have been laid upon the Oriental influence, which is, 
moreover, so marked in the Amis et Amiles, the poem upon 

5 [bid., II, p. 435. 

8 Tbid., p. 439. 

7 Frazer, the final authority on matters of religion and superstition 
among primitive peoples, in reference to the blood-covenant, refers to 
H. C. Trumbull, Blood Covenant, Phila., 1808, pp. 8-12: J. G, Frazer, 
Sel phe III, Taboo and the Perils of the Soul, p. 130, London, 


8 Trumbull, Blood Covenant, p. 320. Cf. Grimm, Deutsche Rechts- 
alterthiimer, I, 163 ff., 263; 265-6. 


80 


PHASES OF FEUDAL CUSTOM 


which Flach bases so large a part of his discussion. In any 
case, this blood-covenant, styled compagnonnage by Flach, is 
quite other than the form of bond characteristic of a Germanic 
chieftain and his chosen group of warriors. 

Under the next following rubric, Compagnonnage sous les 
rois francs,° compagnonnage is considered as the relation of 
senior and commendati, an unmistakable instance of superior 
to inferior, having to do doubtless with the same institution of 
homme-a-seigneur relationship among the Germanic tribes, 
but sharing nothing in common with the blood covenant of the 
Scandinavians. The subsequent chapter’® bears upon compag- 
nonnage as the uniting together of members of the same family 
bound by ties of blood kinship. 

In the next part,'t the same word is applied to the relation 
borne by a sezgneur to his maisnie, that is, to the vassals com- 
posing his personal retinue, while in the following division of 
the subject,?? Flach cites the case where thirty thousand men 
are dependent upon one lord, under whom they set out in 
search of adventure. This last example is from the poetry. In 
the last chapter but one, La Fratermité fictive,** poetic friend- 
ships such as that of Roland and Oliver are dwelt upon. And 
finally, the chapter entitled Le Compagnonnage parfait,** 
which is to be thought of as the ultimate expression of 
compagnonnage, an ideal which is realized when two men are 
predestined by Divine Will to be relatives, to be brothers, 
according to a purely poetic sentiment never to be met with in 
any feudal régime. ae 

These last two chapters are an epitome of the whole article, 
showing at once the faults and the merits of an apparently 
historical article, of no mean literary merit, but based almost 
exclusively upon poetic sources, and upon analogies which, 
though clearly plausible, are extraneous to French feudal con- 
ditions, of record in history. 


9Flach, Origines de Tancienne France, II, p. 442. 
10 [bid., p. 445. 
11 Jbid., p. 455. 
12 Tbid., p. 460. 
13 Tbid., p. 471. 
14 Tbid., p. 485. 
81 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


In the development of this theory of the equality of men in 
the feudal age, in addition to this analogy with Scandinavian 
custom, and an array of historical facts concerning the homme- 
to-seigneur relation in French history, Flach lays great stress 
upon the use of certain words in the epic poetry which are 
construed by him to convey an idea of equality among men, 
and a form and degree of figmental brotherhood. This error 
of judgment arises chiefly out of his misinterpretation of the 
words compagnon—usually in the vocative form compains— 
and pair, or compere. 

Flach interprets compains as always denoting this fraternité 
fictive. The generally accepted etymological meaning is one 
who eats bread with another. There are instances in the poetry 
where the word could be understood as indicating some closer 
relation than acquaintance, or interest in a common cause, but 
examples are always at hand where the word is impossible of 
rendition except in the broadest sense of casual amity, and 
the conventional term of greeting in the daily affairs of men 
with men. Such is the use of the word—to mention but a 
single instance of many—in line 2879 of Guy de Nanteuil, a 
poem of the end of the twelfth century: “Compeins, que feites 
vous? quer poigniés a bandon.” 

The context shows that the word is employed by one man to 
another whom he has never before seen. The sole relation be- 
tween them happens to be that, although from different coun- 
tries, of different nationality and serving in different armies, 
they are’at the moment fighting a common enemy. 

Another word that Flach has adduced as proof of this 
brotherhood of men, without full regard to its correct meaning, 
is compere, or per, which he takes in the sense of equality only. 
In a discussion upon the origin of the twelve peers, Lot tabu- 
lates the connotations of the word as follows.”*® 


1. La signification premiére de par, celle d’homme de méme condition 
sociale et politique, s’est conservée naturellement pendant tout le 


15 Gui de Nantewil, ed. Meyer, Paris, 1861. v. 2879. 
16 F. Lot, Quelques mots sur lVorigine des Pairs de France (Revue 
historique, LIV, 1894, p. 35). 


82 


PHASES OF FEUDAL CUSTOM 


moyen age, mais ce mot a pris des acceptions plus particuliére dés 
une é€poque ancienne; 2. il désigne les époux; 3. il désigne des 
fréres ou des cousins unis par un serment commun; 4. il s’applique a 
la fois au seigneur at au vassal; 4. pair désigne encore les vassaux 
bénéficiers de l’empereur, etc.; 6. en combinant le sens premier et le 
sens quatriéme, le mot est devenu, depuis le XI° siécle, l’équivalent de 
baron. 


Then, speaking of the fourth meaning of the word pair, that 
is, its application at one and the same time to homme and 
seigneur, Lot adds: 


Les historiens et les juristes (Championniére, Lehuerou, Flach, I, p. 
231 etc.) n’ont pas saisi cette signification particuliére du mot pair. 


Ils n’ont pas vu qu'il s’agissait d’une relation de seigneur a vassal et 


ont cru a une relation d’égal a égal. Tous les pairs auraient ainsi 
formé une sorte d’association de secours mutuel. Ils ont bati ainsi 
toute une théorie juridique, qui, n’étant fondée que sur des textes mal 
interprétés, ne tient naturellement pas debout.17 


The impossibility of the juxtaposition of two men as equals 
is well illustrated by the Quatre Fils Aymon. Born of the 
same mother, no one of them distinguished above the others 
by title or office, an equality of mutual relation might have 
existed among the four brothers. Or lacking that equality, the 
eldest son, from the dignity of his age, might have seemed 


17 [bid., p. 35, note 4. Cf. G. Monod (Revue historique, LII, 1893, 
Pp. 446): Cette seconde partie... pourra donner leu a d’assez graves 
critiques. On reprochera surtout a M. Flach d’avoir accordé une im- 
portance trop exclusive a des textes poétiques ...on lui reprochera 
de ne point tenir compte des institutions politiques et militaires des 
Carolingiens, et des usurpations des fonctionnaires, davoir méconnu 
Pimportance du role des bénéfices dés le IX° siécle. On sera étonné de 
ne trouver presque nulle part cités les textes législatifs du VIII° et du 
IX° siécle, et on pensera que le réle inconscient des forces sociales 
spontanées a été singuliérement exagéré. And also, the criticism of C. 
Pfister (Revue historique, LIII 18093, pp. 366-7): M. Flach défait la 
société..... et il la reconstitue presque de toutes pieces... il a défaitt, 
en plein X°® siécle, la société, et il la refaite par la protection. And 
ibid., p. 358, note 1: Parfois M. Flach a détourné les textes de leur 
sens, en les citant isolément et en les détachant de leur cadre; ainsi, 
dans les Capitulaires de Meersen, le mot par désigne non pas les 
vassaux ayant juré fidéhté d un méme suzerain, mais bien les trois 
fréres-rois présents a Ventrevue. 

As Flach was born in 1846, this article on Compagnonnage in 1890 
represents the best results of this noted legal historian’s work at his 
maturity. 


83 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


entitled to assume the authority. But such was not the case; 
this happened to be contrary to the exigencies of those times. 
And Renaud, because of his valiant and energetic disposition, 
took precedence over his eldest brother, Alard, and exercised 
full authority with regard to all the rest.** 

A seeming contradiction of this system of superimposed strata 
in society is found in the expression fréres d’armes, the fra- 
ternity of arms, But the term fréres d’armes does not signify 
equality of two men in respect to each other, nor any mutual 
devotion of two men so related. What is conveyed by the term 
is adequately stated by the learned Du Cange in his definition 
of fratres armorum: Fratres armorum, Qui sub eodem vexillo 
militabant.1® The Fratres armorum are soldiers that fight 
under one standard, and serve one lord. Such a grouping of 
warriors equal in respect to each other only by reason of their 
individual subjection to a master under whom they serve, 
is described in the twenty-first Dissertation of Du Cange.”° 
The grouping together of these men in one common bond does 
not imply any idea of devotion to one another, but is due to 
the obligation of service that each one owes to the lord hold- 
ing authority over them. A full comprehension of the cogency 
of this primal fact in its bearing upon the social conditions of 
the eleventh and twelfth centuries in France, is the essential 
basis for an adequate interpretation of the institutions and cus- 
toms of the entire medieval period. 

If anything further need be said in support of the conception 
of feudal society as a uniform mass of parts superimposed in 
ascending strata, Du Cange has given that final word by the 
fashion in which he defines compares: Compares praeterea 
dicti Pares, mter se comparati respectu superioris domini.2* 
Thus on every hand is pointed out authoritatively the fact 
that the feudal man-to-man relation was one of inferior to 
superior, and never of equal to equal. 


18 Chanson des Quatre Fils Aymon, ed. Castets, Montpellier, 19009, 


Riis 

19 DuCange, Glossarium, sub voce. 

20 [bid., VII, Dissertations, XXI, pp. 80 ff., Des adoptions d@honneur 
en frére, et, par occasion, des fréres d’armes. 

21 Tbid., sub voce. 


84 


PHASES OF FEUDAL CUSTOM 


II 

Interworking with this first principle of the constitution of 
feudal society, that is, the hierarchical organization, is a second 
factor, namely, the resort to force as the arbiter of events. 
These two conceptions, the resultants of many and varied in- 
scrutable causes, were themselves the pillars which, for a space 
of about two hundred years, maintained to a large degree 
intact the customs of feudal life in France. Never since the 
period of full feudalism in France has force occupied so domi- 
nant a place in the life of every individual coming within the 
wide range of its jurisdiction. In the period of French history 
here under consideration, force was unlimited and undefined 
with reference to any high moral standard. Right and wrong 
were recognized, of course, but they did not determine the ap- 
plication of force, since force was paramount. When the per- 
sonal non-property relationship of homme-d-seigneur waned 
and disappeared in the tenth century, moral obligations ceased 
to be duly recognized, and their place in the counsels of men 
was usurped by the domination of expediency and physical 
strength. 

This crude fact is demonstrated in the most tangible manner 
in those feudal epics which retain to an unusual degree the 
- spirit of the epoch of the first general functioning of the land- 
tenure system. For example, the first branch of the Quatre 
Fils Aymon, which is occupied with the war between Beuves 
d’Aigremont and Charlemagne, notably embodies this idea of 
primitive force, barbarous in execution, and resorting to any 
kind of pretext for a motive. 

In this poem, of the end of the twelfth century in its present 
form but of earlier composition, Charlemagne declares his in- 
tention of waging war on Beuves because the latter has re- 
fused to yield the homage demanded by Charlemagne. “If I 
can hold him in my power,” says Charlemagne, “he shall be 
hung on high with no delay.”?? The answer of Aymon is 
shrewd to the point of cunning, and in keeping with feudal 
motives. | 


22 Quatre Fils Aymon, vv. 69-70. 
85 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


“Sire,” says Aymon, “may God aid you therein. But know well, 
emperor, that before you hold Aigremont and its gleaming towers, and 
before you work your pleasure upon the duke, you will have lost so 
many of your people that no man living will be able to count them, and 
you yourself, king, will be sore afflicted thereby. For the duke is no 
coward to flee basely; rather is he a bold and warlike knight, and has 
many friends who will not fail to aid him in his direst need.”28 


And by dint of such reasoning, without regard to the justice 
of the matter, Charlemagne is tamed down to a less truculent 
course of action. 

In the succeeding division of the same poem, which properly 
deals with the adventures of the four sons of Aymon, and is 
distinct from the opening episode concerning the quarrel of the 
emperor with Beuves d’Aigremont, the same method of rea- 
soning is employed by the barons. Charlemagne has long per- 
secuted the four sons of Aymon, and persists in his course in 
spite of the fact that the sympathy of many of his barons 
is with the oppressed sons. At last one of the barons appeals 
to Charlemagne for peace in this fashion: 


“Sire, hear my advice. You have declared your will: now I will tell 
you something of my thought. You know how ably the counts have 
withstood you. Richard and Alard are of the best blood in France, and 
they are of a powerful family. They are relatives of Girard de Rous- 
sillon, of Doon of Nanteuil; the duke Beuves d’Aigremont was of their 
family. And they are cousins of Richard of Ruem, and of Estolt, the 
son of Odon. And Ogier and the archbishop Turpin are kinsmen of 
theirs, and I myself, my lord. And you need never think that if any 
of the four sons should come into our power, that I would hand them 
over to you. No, not I, nor any of the others whom I have men- 
tioned to you. For the love of God, king, make peace with them. 
This war has lasted too long, and too many men have lost their lives.” 

When the king heard this, his blood ran hot, and his face reddened 
like glowing charcoal. And he ground his teeth and shook his head, so 
that there was not a man present, however powerful he might be, that 
did not tremble.24 


The extremes to which the application of force might be 
carried is well related in an episode in Girbert de Metz, where 
28 Ibid., 74-84. 
24 [bid., 5549-5590. 
86 


PHASES OF FEUDAL CUSTOM 


in a factional fight that arises in the king’s court, the queen 
sympathizes with the Loherain family to the point of taking 
an active part. 

“And the queen did no small havoc, for she held in her hand a keen 
sword, and when the wounded attempted to raise themselves up, the 


queen struck from behind, and brought them down dead upon the 
marble floor.25 


Some of the feudal epics are mere recitals of recourse to 
violence. The chanson of Garin le Loherain is a series of suc- 
cessive appeals to force of arms by two families in their strug- 
gle for supremacy. Aye d’ Avignon, Gui de Nanteuil, Atol, are 
replete with systematic violence finding vent in the duel, and 
in organized treachery. The poem of Auberi le Bourgoing de- 
pends for the chief action of its plot upon constant and un- 
scrupulous exercise of physical superiority. 

Against the predominance of force, there inhered even in 
the barbarity of the tenth century certain ameliorating in- 
fluences working for some sort of restraint of the crude spirit 
of the people. First, of course, was the Church, which never 
ceased from the earliest times throughout the whole history of 
France to wield some stabilizing influence upon civil and 
domestic life. The occasional instances of the interference of 
the church in worldly matters that have come down in written 
record, such as the tréve de Dieu or the intervention in the 
election of monarchs, by no means define the vast influence 
that must have been exerted by the one unified, coordinated 
organization of the age. Whether or not the weight of this 
vast power was felt more in a civil than in a religious way, 
the fact is not altered that no consideration of the history of 
France can fail to recognize it. But possibly by reason of the 
fact that the religious influence of the Church in feudal times 
was rather intangible from the viewpoint of a man of that age, 
there is little direct reflection of it in the feudal poetry. And 
therefore this discussion is limited to the second of these two 
25 Girbert de Metz, ed. Stengel (Romamische Studien, ed. Boehmer, 


I, p. 521, Strassburg, 1875), laisse XX. Cf. similar scene in Aiol, ed. 
Normand and Raynaud, Paris, 1877, vv. 5980 ff. 


87 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


influences that tended towards the regulation of the appeal to 
force. 

This second power was the tradition of law that persisted 
from the time of Charlemagne, even in the period of primitive 
feudalism, when all the instruments of government used by 
Charlemagne to enforce the law had crumbled away, or had 
been diverted from the prerogatives of the crown. The con- 
ception of this trend was embodied in the word loyauté; not 
‘loyalty’ in the modern sense of constant faithfulness, but 
rather in its etymological sense of regulation by law or custom. 
One vital phase of this tendency was the custom of formal 
disavowal of friendly relations that was supposed to precede 
recourse to brute force and open hostility in its most savage 
manifestations. 

At the very beginning of the tenth century, the sources 
show the existence of a custom known by the symbol festuca, 
‘a straw,’ through which was consummated the severance of 
friendly relations between homme and seigneur. The custom 
of breaking allegiance through the symbolism of a straw was 
connected in origin with the grant of a benefice by the same 
symbol. Just as the straw given by the seigneur to his homme 
was the token of the gift of a benefice, and later of a fief, so 
the return of the straw to the seigneur by the vassal became 
the sign of the renouncing of allegiance. 

One of the earliest examples on record of the practice of this 
custom is found in the Chronicle of Ademar, who relates an 
incident in connection with the reign of Charles le Simple. 
According to this account, in the year 920, 
the leaders of the Franks, being assembled together in the accustomed 
manner for the transacting of the public business of the kingdom, with 
unanimous agreement, for the reason that king Charles was of ignoble 
disposition, throwing straws from their hands, they rejected him, that 


he might no longer be their lord: and they left him alone in the 
midst of the field, being separated from him.2é6 


The ritual is identical in every instance where it is employed, 


26 Fa Chronico Ademari Cabannensis, anno 920 (Recueil des his- 
toriens des Gaules et de la France, VIII, p. 233, Paris, 1871). 


88 


PHASES OF FEUDAL ‘CUSTOM 


except that sometimes a twig, or a rod, or blades of grass, etc., 
are used in place of the straw.?7 In the poem of Raoul de 
Cambrai is found an example of this early custom. Raoul has 
struck his esquire Bernier with the piece of a broken spear, 
thus forfeiting the right to retain Bernier in his service. Then 
Bernier says: 

“My lord Raoul, this our discussion is ended, by reason of the 
wrong that you have done me.” And from between the links of his 
steel hauberk he took three tufts of ermine that he wore, and threw 
them towards Raoul, and said “Fellow, I defy you! Never say that I 
have betrayed you.”28 


Until the twelfth century, this procedure by symbol of the 
festuca was restricted to the relations between seigneur and 
homme. In this century, however, it began to have a wider 
application, and with a more extended usage underwent a 
change in terminology. From this time on, the custom was 
known as desfiance, and the older symbol of the straw was 
made use of only in a figurative sense, as in the modern ex- 
pression, rompre la paille avec quelqu’un, which in Middle 
French was rompre le festu avec quelqu’un.”® 

Desfiance, from the Latin *difiidantia, the formal breaking of 
faith or friendly relation between two men, in the twelfth and 
thirteenth centuries in France obtained general recognition. 
With the possible exception of homage, no other custom re- 
ceives wider attention in feudal French literature than 
desfiance.*° Historical instances of the working of the custom 
are related by Villehardouin,** Mouskes,?? Beaumanoir,** and 
Froissart.** 


27 Grimm, Deutsche Rechtsalterthtimer, 4th edition, Leipzig, 1899, I, 
pp. 168-190. 

28 Raoul de Cambrai, 2307-2318. 

29 Cf. Pasquier, Recherches VIII, 58. 

30 Cf. Du Cange, under diffidare, for other examples. 

31 Villehardouin, Conquéte de Constantinople, ed. N. de Wailly, Paris, 
1909, sec. 207-215. 

32 Mouskes, Chronique rimée, 30852. 

33 SE ge Coutumes du Beauvoisis, ed. Beugnot, Paris, 1842, II, 
sec. 1680. 
: a Froissart, Chroniques, ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove, Bruxelles, 1868, 

» D. 43. 


89 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


One of the clearest examples of this usage is found in Ville- 
hardouin, an episode of the year 1203. The emperor Alexis of 
Constantinople had broken his word in regard to a promise 
made to the French army. Then the barons held an assembly 
and declared that the emperor would never keep his promise, 
for never had he on any occasion told the truth. And they 
resolved to send worthy messengers to demand that he keep 
his word, and if he should not do so, he should be defied by 
them. | 

For this message were chosen Conon de Béthune and 
Geoffroi de Villehardouin, and other responsible men. And 
they came into the palace, and into the court of the emperor, 
and by the consent of the other messengers, Conon de Béthune 
spoke thus: “Sire, we come to you on behalf of the French 
army ; you have sworn to them, as has your father, to keep the 
covenant that you have made with them, and they have your 
written compact. They have required it of you oftentimes, and 
we do require it of you again, that you keep the agreement 
which is between them and you. If you do that, there is peace: 
if you do it not, know that henceforth they will hold you 
neither for lord nor for friend, but they will endeavor to 
take what belongs to them by whatsoever means they may. 
And they remind you that they do not to you nor to any other 
man aught of harm before having defied him; for they have 
never done treason, and in their country it is not the way of 
men to do it. You have heard what we have said, and you 
will take counsel to do as you please.’’®® 

The heinousness of the sin of omitting desfiance is expressed 
in a passage from the poem of Auberi, where the Duke of 
Dijon confronts Anseis, who had plotted against his life with- 
out defying him: 

The Duke looked at the wretched Anseis, turned towards him, and 
spoke aloud: “Base traitor, you kissed me as my liegeman, and gave 


35 Villehardouin, sec. 207-15. Cf. in this connection Lex Friderici 
imperatoris, anno 1186 (Burchardi et Cuonradi Urspergensium 
Chronicon, p. 65, ed. Pertz, Hannover, 1874) : Statuimus etiam et eodem 
firmiter edicto sancimus, ut quicunque alii damnum facere laedere 
ipsum intendat, tribus ad minus ante diebus per certum nuncium suum 
diffiduciet eum. 


90 


PHASES OF FEUDAL CUSTOM 


me shelter in order to deliver me over to Huedon; never man that 
lived was guilty of such treason.’’36 


In the poem of the Quatre Fils Aymon, the two sons of 
Forque challenge the two sons of Renaud on the allegation that 
“ther father killed ours without making desfiance.”** The 
implication that with desfiance the act would have been legal 
is borne out by a passage from the Gaydon, in which it is re- 
lated how Hertaud, having received Ferraud as a guest, plans 
to kill him. Hertaud discusses the plan with his wife: 


And to her the proven traitor says: “Do you take this knight aside, 
and talk with him, amuse him, until I am clad in my armor. This is 
Ferraud, my mortal enemy, and, before God, I will not eat until I have 
severed his limbs from him.” 

The lady hears him, and her visage is changed thereat. “Sir,” says 
she, “it would be disloyalty if you do him harm when you have lodged 
him; you would be forever called a traitor. But do rightly in this 
matter; give him back his armor, and set him on the road, then defy 
him. You will incur no blame if after that you slay him.’ 


In similar circumstances to the above, the poem of Azol gives 
an instance where a wife urges the observance of desfiance 
even more forcibly. The husband has just stated his intention 
of slaying his guest: 


“What do you say, you devil incarnate? Have you gone mad? You 
have lodged the barons in legal fashion, and have drunk and eaten 
with them! You will start a feud that will end by your being hanged 
like a common robber, and your sons will be torn to pieces by horses, 
and I will be burned alive. God confound them if they do not cut off 
your head, unless you abandon your intention. By Saint Paul I shall 
tell them. Though my limbs were severed from my body, I would not 
consent to such treason.”29° 


The causes for desfiance were numerous. In the Gaydon is 
to be found another pretext sufficient for the purpose here. 


36 Auberi, ed. Tobler, Leipzig, 1870, p. 240. Ci. Hugues Capet, ed La 
Grange, Paris, 1864, v. 1050, Also Gérard de Rossillon, ed. Francisque- 
Michel, Paris, 1856, p. 304, vv. II-12. 

37 Quatre Fils Aymon, 17201. 

38 Gaydon, ed. Guessard and Lucé, Paris, 1862, vv. 4235-4248. 

39 Aiol, 7240-7256. 


OI 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


Gaydon wishes the king to drive the family of traitors from the 
court, and Riol advises him: 
“Sire, command king Charles to give into our hands the treacherous 


family; let him banish them and confiscate their lands. And if he holds 
them against your will, defy him, and renounce your homage.”4° 


Since private warfare in the earliest period of feudalism was 
the privilege of every man, any cause that might arouse anger 
between two men was occasion sufficient for desfiance. Ex- 
amples of the usage are constantly at hand in the feudal poetry. 
The absence of the procedure in any poem is evidence that 
that poem is unusually primitive in composition. In this con- 
nection it is to be noted that in regard to certain of the 
chansons that in the preceding chapter have been indicated as 
pre-feudal, the absence of desfiance confirms the opinion of 
their age. There is no mention whatsoever of desfiance in the 
Gormund et Isembard. In the Raoul de Cambrai, there is no 
mention of desfiance before Raoul invades the Vermandois. 
In fact, even after Raoul has laid waste much of their country, 
the four sons of Herbert do not know that Raoul is advancing 
upon them.‘ 

In the Floovant, the verb form deffi occurs, but apparently 
in the sense only of the modern ‘defy’: upon attacking another 
man, one warrior cries out “Straightway do I defy you with 
my Turkish sword.”’*? The case, however, is not so certain as 
it is with regard to the Gormund et Isembard and the Raoul de 
Cambrai, in which there can be no question as to the absence of 
any reference to desfiance. 

When desfiance had been regularly made, the results, as a 
general rule, might be of three kinds: (1) private warfare; 
(2) individual execution of vengeance; (3) the duel. 

War was the outcome of the instance related by Ville- 
hardouin. Likewise, in the Beuves d’ Aigremont, the opening 

40 Gaydon, 3082-3087. 

41 Cf. Raoul de Cambrai, 2305. Raoul says: Ne lor faut guerre, de 
ma part les desfi! This is not desfiance, but merely insolence on the 
part of Raoul, being said after Raoul has engaged in active hostility 


against the four sons of Herbert. 
42 Floovant, 1157. 


g2 


PHASES OF FEUDAL CUSTOM 


episode of the Quatre Fils Aymon, a messenger sent by the 
king announces to Beuves that if he fail to pay homage as 
demanded, a state of war is to exist forthwith.** 

The second fashion of procedure, that of individual ven- 
geance, might take form in the murder of one of the parties, 
as in the Aubert, where Gascelin comes upon his enemy to slay 
him as he prays.** And Gascelin is adjudged guiltless. 

A third result manifests that resort to force which is in- 
separably identified with the feudal epoch. Particularly in the 
cases of personal injury, or the challenging of a witness, 
desfiance was very apt to be followed by a duel between the 
two men, though not necessarily. 

The historical duel is well illustrated by the following ex- 
ample from the Wiponis Vita Chuonradi, in the year 1033.*° 
According to this account, 


between the Saxons and the pagans at that time, fighting and raids 
were being carried on incessantly, and when the emperor came to 
investigate, he began to inquire which side had first broken the peace 
that had long been observed inviolate between them. The pagans said 
that the peace had first been disturbed by the Saxons, and they would 
prove this by the duel, if the emperor would so direct. On the other 
hand the Saxons pledged themselves to refute the pagans in like 
manner by single combat, though as a matter of fact their contention 
was untrue. The emperor after consulting his lords permitted the 
matter to be settled between them by a duel. 

Two champions, each selected by his own side, immediately engaged. 
Finally the Christian fell wounded by the pagan. Thereupon his party 
was seized with such presumption and elation, that, had the emperor 
not been present, they would forthwith have rushed upon the 
Christians.4® 


One of the earliest poetry indications of this duel is found 
in the Floovant. This seems to be prior to the period of formal 


48 Quatre Fils Aymon, 214-238. Cf. Fierabras, ed. Guessard, Paris, 
1860, vv. 5479 ff. 

44 4duberi, ed. Tarbé, pp. 117 ff. 

45 Wiponis Vita Chuonradi (Monumenta Germamae Historica, 
Scriptores, XI, p. 271, cap. 33, anno 1033). 

46 Cf. Pfeffer, Die Formalitdten des gottesgerichtlichen Zweikampfs 
in der altfranzésischen Epik (Zeitschrift fiir romanische Literatur, IX, 
1885, pp. 1-74). This is an excellent analysis of the judicial duel, with 
citation of poetical examples for each phase. 


93 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


desfiance, but the conception that might is the sole arbiter, is 
very evidently revealed in the readiness of the aggrieved party 
to place reliance on the duel for just amend. 

In this poetical example of the trust in strength, a warrior, 
Richier, is depicted as having unwittingly slain the son of his 
host. The host, Emelons, charges his guest: 


“Vassal, you have villainously treated me; I only had one dear son, 
and through your pride you have slain him. Forthwith shall I cut your 
limbs from your body.’’47 


Richier pleads his innocence of any evil intent: 


“By the faith that I owe you,” says Richier, “I will not lie to you. 
This morning I was wandering through the forest when I met a knight 
who rode towards me with a strong following. So insolent was he that 
he would not speak with me, but struck me a great blow upon my shield, 
and be assured I struck him back straightway. But know you that 
I killed him against my will, for otherwise he had slain me.”48 

When Emelons hears that, he knows not what he should say, 
then he bespeaks Richier after this wise, “Vassal, will you stand proof 
that you are right?” 

“Yes,” says Richier; and they give mutual pledge that the battle shall 
take place with no delay.*? 


In the fray that follows, Emelons is defeated, and when his 
life is spared, he promptly yields to the justice incident to the 
trial by arms. 


“Vassal,” says Emelons, “you are a right worthy man, and your 
great valor has subdued my pride. Assuredly, friend, I pardon you the 
death of my dear son.”5° 


In the Aye d’ Avignon, mortal enmity is aroused between 
Berengier and Garnier when the king gives to Garnier a wife 
whom Berengier also coveted before her marriage. Berengier 
persuades a kinsman of his, Amauguin, to charge Garnier with 
treason.** 

47 Floovant, 1046-1040. 

48 Tbid., 1060-1068. 

49 Tbid., 1087-1093. 


50 Tbid., LIQI-1194. 
51 Cf. the duel in Garin le Loherain, II, pp. 25 ff. 


04 


PHASES OF FEUDAL CUSTOM 


And Amauguin commenced his speech thus: “Emperor, hear what 
we shall tell you. My brother and I were seated on the marble steps 
at Verberie, when Garnier began to say to us, ‘My lords, what shall 
we do? This king is exceedingly base and treacherous, and is a cow- 
ardly and senseless knave; right little of our ancestral fiefs has he left 
us. I am like to slay him in the presence of the whole army, or in 
forest or river, or where else we may.’ ”52 


Then the king made the counts to come before him,** and in 
this official court, the accusation is repeated against Garnier, 
the false charge being made this time by Auboin, another one 
of the epic Family of Traitors. And when Auboin ceases to 
speak, 


Garnier replies, “Treacherous enemy, if I live and God help me, I will 
_make you take back your slander.”54 


Then they give their pledges, and the king receives them.*5 
The exact nature of these pledges is shown with more detail 
in the description of a similar scene in Gaydon, when Gaydon 
stands before Charlemagne accused falsely of treason. 

“Vassal,” says Charlemagne, “give me your hostages and delay not; 


else harm will come to you of it. I will have your right hand cut off, 
with which you gave me your pledge.’’5é 


Here the word for pledge, gaige, is the same as in the preced- 
ing passage from the Aye d’Avignon. This pledge, or gauge, is 
merely some formal token of the challenge, for example a 
glove. But as the instance in the Gaydon shows, it had to be 
followed with the giving of hostages. In the Gaydon passage 
under discussion, Charlemagne continues thus: 


“Whoever goes hostage for you risks being torn asunder, and his 
body burned and cast to the winds.” And when the French heard 
their lord threaten so, not one speaks, except those upon whom it is 
a necessity to offer themselves, namely, the vassals of Gaydon bound 
to him by reason of the fiefs they hold of him. 


52 Aye d’ Avignon, 233-249. 
53 Tbid., 259-260. 

54 [bid., 280-281. 

55 Tbid., 282. 

56 Gaydon, 625-659. 


95 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


So Rispeus of Nantes, and Joiffrois, and Guy de Biaufort, and the 
valiant Riol step forward and offer themselves as hostages, saying, 
“Sire, take us as pledge, first upon our fiefs, and then upon our lives; 
for if he is vanquished we wish to live no longer.” 

But Charlemagne replies, “Stand back! You are all his liege-men, 
and a man who is accused of treason cannot offer his vassal in hostage.” 


Finally Naynmon of Bavaria offers himself as hostage, and 
Charlemagne replies: 


“Naynmon, it shall be as you will.’”’57 


After either side have given their hostages to the king, it is 
agreed that the battle will be on the morrow, for the pledges 
have been duly given.*® 

Until the battle takes place, both men are under the most 
strict surveillance. More than ever are they held to account 
with regard to the congié, or obligation devolving upon them 
to secure permission to leave the court of the king, or superior 
lord, no matter what the occasion might be. This custom of 
requesting congié was in effect at all times, but doubly so in a 
moment like this, when a man was considered guilty of treach- 
erous intent if he departed from the court without formal per- 
mission being sought and granted. In the Gaydon is shown 
how serious the offense was of waiving congié. Renaud ex- 
presses the king’s will in these words: 

“Charlemagne summons Gaydon to come to him at Paris, and beg his 


mercy, and amend that in which he has done wrong. For he departed 
rashly from his court without requesting congié.”’59 


In the Raoul de Cambrai, the setting aside congié is equiva- 
lent to a declaration of war. Bernier, insulted by Raoul, cries: 


“Bring me my arms and my hauberk, my good sword and my helmet! 
From this court I depart without congié !’’6° 


And straightway Bernier goes over to the hostile camp, and 
engages in war with Raoul. 


57 [bid., 718-722. 

58 Aye d Avignon, 282. 

59 Gaydon, 3146-3154. 

60 Raoul de Cambrai, 1725-1727. 


06 


PHASES OF FEUDAL CUSTOM 


After hostages had been given, and the duel arrranged for 
the next day, the next step in the procedure incident to the 
duel was the watching and praying in the church. In Aye 
d Avignon is related how 


Garnier keeps his watch, and the bishop Morise chants the mass, 
_and Garnier makes a gift to the church of a hundred pieces of silver.®1 


After the church service the two warriors each swear on the 
sacred relics that his cause is just. The account of the cere- 
mony of oath-taking in the duel of the two sons of Forque 
with the two sons of Renaud in the Quatre Fils Aymon is 
especially relevant: 

“My lords, you must now swear upon the sacred relics, for such is 
the law.” Then the traitors come forward and kneel, and swear by the 
sacred relics that Renaud killed their father through treason. Then 
kiss they the relics, and arise and turn back. But even as they turn, 
they both stagger, and the whole court sees them come nigh to fall- 
ing, save that they bear each other up. And Roland says to those who 
behold it. “Surely this is a poor pledge of victory.” 

Then the two sons of Renaud come forward, and kiss the relics, and 
swear that the sons of Forque have lied concerning this treason. And 
they arise upright, and go back.’’2 


In the morning arrangements are made for the duel. The 
field of combat is guarded by a hundred of the king’s men, to 
prevent interference by one side or the other. In the historical 
instance cited above from the Wipoms Vita Chuonradi, there 
is shown the danger that one side may rush to the assistance 
of their champion, or may follow up his victory with a general 
onslaught. So in the body of the feudal poetry, the duel that is 
not interrupted by treachery of one of the parties is an 
exception.® 

In the chanson of Gaydon elaborate preliminaries take place 
on either side with this object in view. The passage in question 
relates how 


61 Aye d’Avignon, 344-346. Ci. Auberi, ed. Tarbé, p. 138, vv. 6 ff. 
62 Quatre Fils Aymon, 17293-17317. ; 
63'Cf. Gui de Nanteuil, ed. Meyer, Paris, 1861, 1093 ff. 


97 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


Guy d’Autefoille assembles a hundred of the Family of Traitors, 
who plan to set an ambush of a thousand men so that if they see their 
champion, Guion, defeated in the conflict, they may rush forth and 
slay his opponent, Ferraud.®4 


Likewise the friends of Ferraud in their turn prepare for 
the combat. Riol summons his friends: 


“Let us take two thousand men, and ambush them in yonder woods. 
And when Ferraud fights his duel, if any other than Guion do him 
harm, we will aid him without delay.’ 


In the Aye d’ Avignon, however, no formalities occur prior to 
the duel, but when it becomes evident to the traitors that their 
champion is on the verge of defeat, they are not loath to lend 
him aid. 

Achard and Hondré, who were his kinsmen, rush into the field with 
thirty of their men, And they had slain Garnier straightway, were it 
not for the king’s guards, who are more than a hundred. For they 


quickly engage the traitors, slay twenty-two of them, and cast the re- 
maining eight into prison.®é 


Thereupon the duel is resumed. Garnier is victorious, and 
Auboin pleads guilty: 


“Strike me not again, gentle lord, and I will confess the whole 
treason.’’67 


Then king Charles, who as lord of both men has ultimate 
authority, passes judgment in this wise: 
“Barons, take this knave, and the eight men from the prison, who 


charged Garnier with treason, and wished to kill him; for it is but 
right that each of them shall have his reward.’’68 


After which Auboin and the eight survivors of those who 
intervened on his behalf are put to death. 
The account of this duel in the Aye d’ Avignon is not explicit 


64 Gaydon, 5782-5790. Cf. Gui de Nanteuil, 966 ff. 
65 Gaydon, 6317-6324. 

86 Aye d’ Avignon, 635-646. 

87 Ibid., 673-674. 

68 [bid., 713-717. 


PHASES OF FEUDAL CUSTOM 


as regards the fate of the hostages. The customary procedure 
is indicated, however, in the Gaydon, where the traitors save 
the lives of the bondsmen only by bribing the king with rich 
presents. 

The purpose of the present chapter, as in the case of the 
preceding, has been to point out the parallel between the 
historical data and the early French poetic material. 

If feudalism in England was in general limited to the em- 
ployment of the land tenure system, and in Germany, Italy, 
and Spain (or perhaps better Aragon), emphasized chiefly the 
political independence of the barons, in France feudalism at- 
tained more than in all these countries a normal and unhindered 
development. Therefore the feudal poetry of France, reveal- 
ing an intimate portraiture of the private life of the period, 
affords the most valuable field of investigation in literature of 
the workings of the social forces of feudalism. 


CHAPTERGVI 


CONCLUSION. 


I 


The result of this study of the French Feudal Epic is as 
follows: With every succeeeding phase of the investigation 
has become more evident the sharp distinction that must be 
drawn between the purely Feudal Epic and the National Epic 
on one side, and the romans d’aventure at the other extreme. 
During the course of the study, the poems that have been 
chosen as most feudal have ranged in three groups, similar to 
the three-fold distinction just made. In the first group are the 
pre-feudal poems in which the royal element predominates— 
that is, they lead out from the purely feudal poetry in the di- 
rection of the Roland. These pre-feudal poems that verge to- 
wards the royal are the following: the Floovant, the Couronne- 
ment de Louis, the Beuves d’ Aigremont, and the Gormund et 
Tsembard. 

In the second group are the purely feudal poems of the 
tenth and eleventh centuries, the period of the full vigor of 
feudalism before the influence of the Christian element of 
Chivalry had begun to make itself felt: in this group are the 
Auberi le Bourgoing, the Raoul de Cambrai, the Cycle of Garin 
le Loherain, including the Garin, Mort Garin, Gerbert de Metz, 
and Anseis de Metz. 

The third group contains the poems of the twelfth century, 
representing the later feudal period, and verging into the 
roman d’aventure and the romance of chivalry. In this third 
group the following have been studied: Aye d’ Avignon, Quatre 
Fils Aymon, Atol, Gérard de Rossillon, Ogier, Guy de Nanteuil, 
Guy de Bourgogne, Otinel, Gaydon, Hervis de Metz. In addi- 


100 


CONICLUSION 


tion to these poems, a survey has been made of various others 
which have been deemed too far removed from the feudal 
spirit to come strictly within the range of this study, except in- 
cidentally, where in them earlier elements were to be found. 

The first point, then, that has been emphasized, is the differ- 
ence in style, treatment, and most important, in material, of 
the pure feudal epic as contrasted with the royal and roman 
daventure groups. The feudal group excels by far the remain- 
der of the French epic poetry in vraisemblance, in every detail 
of representation of the life and manners of the age in which 
it was composed, in custom and institution, in geography and 
political content. The fact cannot be too clearly brought out 
that the impression of unreliability gained justly from the 
greater mass of the poetry, the roman d’aventure type espe- 
cially, is erroneous when applied to the feudal poetry. The 
feudal poetry does not concern itself, any more than the 
National and aventure poetry, with any conscious attempt to 
reproduce historical characters and events in their true propor- 
tion. But the feudal poems do what the others do not: they 
unconsciously portray—and precisely because of the uncon- 
scious nature of the genre they portray in simplicity and artless 
accuracy—the different phases of life prevailing in the tenth 
and eleventh centuries. 

Finally, there has been emphasized one other feature peculiar 
to the feudal poetry alone. The feudal poetry is a direct out- 
growth of the epoch in which it originated. That is to say, not 
solely of the time at which it was formally arranged in verse 
and fixed in something like the form in which we have it. That 
period indeed is meant, but the true origin is not limited so 
closely. The feudal poetry reflects the exact epoch in which it 
was composed; it also represents the period prior to its com- 
position by some twenty-five to fifty years. In other words, it 
is the unconscious reaction of the poet to his environment, 
both at the time of writing, and also including the sum total 
of the experiences of his life among the people of whom he 
wrote. For he wrote of his contemporaries. What significance 
is there in the fact that he gave them names imaginary, or 


IOI 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


out of the dim traditions of the past? The poet who composed 
toward the end of the tenth century called his king Charle- 
magne, perhaps, but his model was Hugues Capet. And though 
the names of the barons came down, some of them, from the 
seventh or eighth century, the living men described by the 
poet were the rebellious nobles of the reign of Hugues Capet. 
When the poet depicts Charlemagne in despicable, contempti- 
ble weakness, he is only picturing the feeble king whom he 
saw at the mercy of his vassals. The accuracy of the feudal 
epic with respect to social institutions discloses, as no analogy 
with historical events could do, the fact that the poet drew 
men as he saw them. This is in sharp contrast with the vague 
and romantic treatment of the later romans d’aventure. 

Consider these two points in their relation to each other: the 
feudal poetry is an accurate and unconscious portrayal; it is 
likewise a portrayal of the period of its composition, and of 
the years immediately preceding. So much has been shown con- 
clusively by the present study. The conclusion is obvious: if the 
manners and institutions can be assigned definitely to certain 
epochs in the social and political development of France as 
recorded in the chronicles and other historical documents, the 
poems fixed in these periods by the direct reflection they give 
of the society in which they originated may be dated with 
greater accuracy than by the study of manuscripts and the 
search for parallel historical events. Such has been the re- 
sult of the present investigation. Its bearing on the poems 
may be mentioned in résumé as follows. These poems have 
been mentioned above in three groups, according to the degree 
of their feudal content: the listing here is made in four groups, 
with reference to the age of each poem. 

In the ninth century were composed Floovant, Couron- 
nement de Lous, Beuves d Aigremont, Gormund et Isembard. 
In the tenth century were composed Raoul de Cambrai and 
Aubert le Bourgoing. In the first half of the eleventh cen- 
tury are to be placed Garin le Loherain, and Mort Garin; and, 
in the last half of the same century, Gerbert de Metz, and 
Anseis de Metz. The poems of the twelfth century, in ap- 


102 


CONCLUSION 


proximate order of composition, are the following: Aye 
d’ Avignon, Quatre Fils Aymon, Aiol, Gérard de Rossillon, 
Ogier, Guy de Nantewl, Guy de Bourgogne, Otinel, Gaydon, 
Hervis de Metz. 


II 

By way of summing up, it is pertinent to devote a few words 
to the bearing of this study on the hypothesis developed by M. 
Joseph Bédier in his work entitled Les Légendes épiques, the 
first of the four volumes having appeared in 1908, and the last 
in 1913 (second edition, vol. I, 1914)). Bédier’s work has been 
reviewed, of course, but prior to this time there has been made 
no new systematic analysis of the material of the French epic 
with regard to its bearing on Bédier’s hypothesis. To make 
such an investigation has been the object of the present study. 
A few words are therefore apposite with regard to the relation 
of the conclusions reached in this study to the validity of 
Bédier’s argument. 

At the outset, as a basis for the discussion, the broad lines 
of Bédier’s hypothesis may be summarized as follows: The 
most ancient chansons de geste, those which have a true his- 
torical foundation in the remote past, do not go back by an un- 
broken tradition of epic chansons to the time, or nearly to the 
epoch, of the events they recount. So much of Bédier’s work 
is purely negative—he discredits the theory generally held 
(almost without exception) until Bédier produced his Légendes: 
épiques. This is undoubtedly the most valuable part of the 
work. In it Bédier attacks opinions that have existed without: 
sufficient raison d’étre, that have become fixed merely because: 
of their traditional authority. He shows plainly the weakness. 
of the grandiose conception of the caniiléne, and stimulates 
new interest in the subject. There remains to be considered 
the system that Bédier has attempted to establish in the place 
of the theory he has discredited. Having determined to his 
- satisfaction that there is in the poetry no element, save some 
historical analogy, which need go back of the twelfth century 
for explanation, Bédier sets out to seek “dans la vie du XII° 


103 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


siécle des circonstances et des conditions propres a expliquer 
la formation de la légende.” These “circonstances”’ Bédier 
finds in the pilgrimages to holy places, and in the Church fairs, 
both springing up in sudden vigor about the end of the eleventh 
century. And the chansons de geste originated then, in the 
twelfth century, or at the earliest, the end of the eleventh, being 
composed by jongleurs who made their living best along the 
pilgrimage routes, and at the Church fairs: and the material, 
or at any rate the historical element of it, was furnished to the 
jongleurs by the monks who wished to advertise their shrines 
to the pilgrims and fairgoers. 

First a few words as to the method by which Beédier clears 
the field to make room for his theory. I quote from G. Huet 
who has given a keen analysis of the subject in the Moyen-Age 
for 1908, and again in the number of 1913: “D/’abord, l’auteur 
semble considérer la théorie qu’il combat, celle de chants 
€piques, transmettant aux hommes du XI° siécle le souvenir 
d’événements du temps de Charlemagne ou méme anterieurs, 
sinon comme absolument chimérique, du moins comme d’une 
invraisemblance extreme, comme une hypotheése a laquelle il ne 
faudrait avoir recours que dans des cas absolument désespérés, 
tous les autres moyens d’explication faisant défaut. Cette 
méfiance me semble exagérée. Un chant épique, une fois qu'il 
existe, petit avoir la vie dure: on sait que des chants du cycle 
des Niebelungen vivaient encore, dans la bouche du peuple, 
aux iles Féroé, dans le premier quart du XIX°® siécle.”? 

Although Bédier has set forth his work in the form of an 
hypothesis, he closes the door to the investigations of others 
in no undecided way: ‘“L’ére des recherches doit étre tenue 
pour close ou elle ne le sera jamais.”? Apropos of which H. 
Suchier suggests: “Auch war wohl der Wunsch der Vater des 
Gedankens, wenn Bédier die Vermutung ausspricht ’L’ére des 
recherches doit étre tenue pour close ou elle ne le sera jamais’; 
ich glaube jenes nicht, halte vielmehr die zweite Alternative 
fur richtig. Trotz Bédiers spottender Kritik wird wahrschein- 


1 Moyen Age, 1908, Pp. 339. 
2 Légendes épiques, I, 17 (2d ed.). 


104 


CONICLUSION 


lich noch manche frappante Ahnlichkeit zwischen Geschichte 
und Dichtung gefunden werden, je tiefer in die Geschichte 
eingedrungen und je mehr von Chansontexten ans Licht be- 
fordert wird.”* It is with the belief so expressed by Suchier 
that the present study has been taken up, a study that the 
writer hopes to continue in the future with greater detail, 
when time permits. 

For the present there may be suggested a few points in 
which Bédier has reached conclusions on insufficient evidence, 
or has failed to anticipate difficulties that oppose his hypothe- — 
sis. Our view must be limited, but within even so small a com- 
pass may be shown enough to suggest what will be the nature 
of a more searching study of the material. 

At the outset of volume III. (p. 4), Bédier inquires: “Pour- 
quoi des poétes du XII° siécle ont-ils pris pour héros de leurs 
romans des hommes morts depuis tant de siecles?’ In this 
question, says Bédier, “tient tout le probleme de l’origine des 
chansons de geste.” The problem is not of such sweeping 
importance with regard to the origin, or the age of the poetry. 
Would Bédier also ask why the modern novel writers some- 
times make use of historical material? Would he ask why 
Vergil put his epic in antiquity? Was Homer an eye-witness 
of the deeds he narrates? The historical epic is the customary 
form, while an epic composed by a contemporary of the events 
narrated is rare.* Bédier’s question is of no import in con- 
nection with the problem of the origin of the poetry. 

In similar fashion Bédier discusses reworkings of the epic 
material.’ There is no apparent connection with the formation. 
_ This may be considered an epitome of Bédier’s work: it is the 
period of the renewing and modification in the twelfth century 
that he has mistaken for the time of the formation of the epic 
poetry. To quote Tavernier: “Vier Bande voller Sagen sollen 
nur das Interesse der Ependichter des 12. Jahrhunderts an 
den Helden der Merowinger- und Karolingerzeit begriin- 

3 Zeitschrift fir romanische Philologie, XXXII, 1908, 736-737. 

4Cf. W. Tavernier, Archiv fiir das Studium der neueren Sprachen, 


CXXXI, 1913, pp. 187-188. 
5 Vol. III, pp. 140 ff. 


105 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


den; aber das erklart sich ohne Sagen besser und einfacher, 
wenn das Interesse fuhlsamer Dichterseelen ftir grosse und 
tapfere Menschen auch der Vergangenheit ttberhaupt einer 
’"Erklarung’ bedarf ... vier Bande voll Légendes épiques, 
um das Interesse gebildeter Dichter an Personlichkeiten wie 
Karl dem Grossen zu erklaren!’® “D’autre part,” says G. Huet, 
discussing the same matter, “il est certain que l’épopée peut, 
d’elle-méme et sans secours extérieurs, conserver le souvenir de 
personnages et de faits historiques. C’est ainsi que—fait bien 
connu, mais particuliérement frappant pour le probleme qui 
nous occupe—Théodoric le Grand a été célébré, sous le nom de 
Dietrich von Bern, par l’épopée allemande durant tout le 
moyen-age ; le Hildebranitslied, que les germanistes placent au 
VIII’ siecle, garde le souvenir de sa lutte contre Odoacre. Ce 
n’est certainement pas l’Eglise qui s’est chargée de perpétuer, 
par des pélerinages et des exhibitions de reliques, la mémoire 
de ce roi, pilier de l’Arianisme.”” | 

Huet concludes (p. 343) that “les faits réunis par M. B. 
prouvent que, dés une époque trés ancienne, clercs et moines 
d’un coté, jongleurs de l’autre, se sont entendus pour exploiter 
les traditions carolingiennes; mais ils ne prouvent pas, avec 
une certitude absolue, que l’origine premiére de ces traditions 
fait cléricale ou monastique, les mentions d’églises ou de mona- 
stéres ayant pu étre introduites dans les chansons aprés coup, 
lors du renouvellement du texte primitif.” In similar fashion 
E. Bourciez, in the Revue critique,? expresses his conviction 
that Bédier does demonstrate that the action in certain poems 
may be localized with some exactness, as in the Raoul about 
the church of Saint-Géri, and the monasteries of Cambrésis 
or of Vermandois. Also that Bédier shows in regard to the 
chansons de geste dealing with Italy, that out of ninety names 
of towns mentioned, seventy are on the Via francigena; the 
others are fantastic names impossible to localize, or names of 
a few great cities that no one could fail to know, even with- 


6 Cf. Tavernier, supra, pp. 210-211. 
7 Moyen Age, 1908, p. 340. 
8 LXVII, 1900, pp. 72-73. 


106 


CONCLUSION 


out having passed that way. Also, in the large towns, such as 
Naples or Milan, there is no important action; if they are 
mentioned, it is in an incidental and vague manner. It is 
therefore impossible, says Bourciez, to deny the close con- 
nection between the romans and “le grand mouvement de la 
foi religieuse qui entraina les pélerins au moyen age.” In our 
opinion the last statement should be qualified somewhat: it is 
impossible to deny the close relation between the knowledge of 
geography, particularly outside of France, with the increas- 
ing prominence of the pilgrimage routes at the beginning of 
the twelfth century. And the connection is closer than had 
been realized before Bédier—the connection, that is, of the 
poems written after the year 1100 with the view of exploiting 
pilgrimages and fairs. But in the light of the present investi- 
gation, the theory of this connection in no wise holds true, for 
the ten poems certainly composed prior to the end of the 
eleventh century, namely, the following: Floovant, Beuves 
d’ Aigremont, Couronnement de Louis, Gormund et Isembard, 
Raoul de Cambra, Auberi le Bourgoing, Garin le Loherain, 
Mort Garin, Gerbert de Metz, Anseis de Metz. The geograph- 
ical details in the above poems depend on no pilgrimage 
routes. 

On the other hand, there are certain centers of fairs, as the 
church of Saint-Géri at Cambrai in the Raoul de Cambrai. To 
consider this typical example for a moment: just what is the 
significance of the frequent mention of the church of Saint- 
Géri in this poem? In the first place the poem discusses no 
saints and no relics. It is the versified narration of a tradition 
of the general Picard district, centered at Cambrai especially, 
but also at Saint-Quentin and Origny. The details of the 
geography are exact. The poet probably lived in the district: 
at least he is intimately acquainted with the region. Suppose 
that he had no interest in the church. Would it be remarkable 
that in the narration of a story traditional in the neighborhood 
he should cast a part of the action around the village church? 
It does not seem surprising or in need of being explained, when 
the nature of the events connected with the church is consid- 


107 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


ered. The marriage service, the burial service, the vigil on the 
night before a duel, are things properly to be performed in a 
church, and such are the usual church elements. In the poem 
of Raoul de Cambrai account should be taken, in addition, of 
the availability of Géri as a rime word—the rime in 7 being 
very facile, if not the most so. It seems more probable there- 
fore that the church is mentioned because it is in the Cambrésis 
district than that the action of the poem is in the Cambreésis 
district because the church was there. Bédier himself admits 
with reference to one poem that the church probably was not 
the originator of the legend; that the monks of Saint-Faron 
began celebrating the tomb of an Ogier only after Ogier had 
become famous in the chanson which bears his name.® Fur- 
thermore, if the poem was to celebrate the church, it might 
reasonably be expected that the poet would relate the life of 
Saint-Géri, or some other legend of saintly tradition. Not 
necessarily in this single instance perhaps, but it is a note- 
worthy fact that in the whole body of the epic poetry, the poem 
celebrating supposedly a certain church, the resting place of a 
saint, or saintly relics, never recounts the life of the saint in 
question or the story of the relics, but always the deeds of 
some local hero—and frequently heroes little worthy of being 
perpetuated in memory by the church. Raoul de Cambrai, the 
brutal, savage, untamed warrior, the desecrator of the church, 
and murderer of devoted nuns—this is the hero whose vile 
deeds inspired, Bédier insists, the monks of Cambrai to per- 
petuate his memory in a chanson of praise, with scarce the 
suggestion of condemnation for his heathen savagery. . There 
is no need of explanation, however, when it: is admitted that 
the part the church plays in the poem is only an incidental 
result of the locality in which it is found. 

This problem of the towns that are not on pilgrimage routes 
and yet play a conspicuous part in the poetry, is met ingeni- 
ously by Bédier, but not with entire success. Aix-la-Chapelle 
and Paris are mentioned, for instance, because of the presence 


9 Tégendes épiques, II, 293. 
10 Cf. G. Huet, Moyen Age, 1913, pp. 427-8. 


108 


CONCLUSION 


in these towns of relics that Charlemagne was supposed to 
have brought from the Orient, the memory of which was to be 
perpetuated by the chansons composed for the occasion. The 
inevitable exception is the city of Laon, which also plays an 
important part in the poetry as one of Charlemagne’s capitals. 
And it is to be constantly kept in mind that by the nature of 
-Bédier’s hypothesis a single exception to the rule is fatal to 
the whole structure. Bédier maintains that each individual 
poem conforms to his theory, that each tradition came into 
poetic form through the monkish and jongleuresque collabora- 
tion. Now, in many of the chansons de geste Charlemagne 
and Louis le Debonnaire hold their court at Laon. Laon is not 
mentioned, as are Aix-la-Chapelle and Paris, with reference 
to the relics distributed by Charlemagne; on the other hand, 
Laon was the capital, in the tenth century, of the last of the 
Carolingians. It follows that there was a direct tradition 
deriving from the epoch when the Carolingians actually had 
Laon for Capital. Thus is further indicated the failure of 
Bédier’s general conclusions when applied to particular 
instances.7+ 

A flaw in the Bédier hypothesis that cannot be explained 
away is pronounced in convincing terms by W. Foerster in his 
review of the work:? ‘Wie ist dies moglich, da die altesten 
Epen (Roland und Willame), die sicher spatestens ins gute 
11. Jahrh. fallen, uns bereits in einem sehr uberarbeiteten, arg 
_zugerichteten Zustand mehrfacher Umarbeitung tberkommen 
sind! Da mtissen sie doch vor dieser Zeit langst bestanden 
haben. Noch mehr, diese altesten Epen zeigen bereits eine 
ganz ausgebildete, feststehende Technik, eigene epischen Stil 
auf, alles Dinge, die nicht auf einmal von selbst entstehen, 
sondern nur das Ergebnis einer langen, langsamen, allmah- 
lichen Entwicklung, die viel langer als ein Jahrhundert sein 
muss, sein konnen. Es ist ganz sicher anzunehmen, dass der 
so griindliche, vorsichtige und scharfsinnige Verfasser diese 
Schwierigkeiten auch seinerseits empfunden haben muss. Er 


11 Cf, ibid., p. 431. 
12 Literarisches Centralblatt fiir Deutschland, 1908, 27 Juni. 


109 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


erwahnt sie zwar nirgends, aber er muss sich wohl mit ihnen 
abgefunden haben, da er sonst seine ikonoklastische Hypothese 
nicht mit solchem Riesenapparat in die Welt gesetzt hatte.’ 
In such instances as the above, Professor Bédier would 
seem to have cleverly avoided the discussion of considerations 
damaging to his own theory. He is not everywhere so success- 
ful, however. In his last volume (IV, 364 ff.) he gives a list 
of personnages of the chansons de geste. Consider the first 
group of names, twelve great personnages “dont il est in- 
différent de localiser ici ou la la légende,” says Bédier. The 
poets got their impression “au hasard de leurs conversations, de 
leurs lectures, de leurs promenades’ (IV, 380). “De leurs 
lectures”! But Bédier has already assured us (p. 368) that 
“nos romanciers étaient gens de médiocre culture, et il est in- 
admissible, nous le reconnaissons pleinement, quils aient ex- 
trait des chroniques latines les matériaux de leurs romans.” 
But pass the contradiction to consider what manner of men 
these jongleurs must have been. They spent their afternoons 
whiling away the time reading books on the life of Charle- 
magne and Charles Martel; they were antiquarians who bor- 
rowed a story here and there from the monks, or bribed some 
cleric for a few hours use of the church records, talked of the 
accounts found in these Latin chronicles on their evening 
walks—and suddenly, in the year 1100 or thereabouts, com- 
posed a series of poetic works, varying from three thousand 
to thirty thousand lines in length, to advertise the monasteries 
at whose behest they wrote. Possibly, if they were merely 
from incidental daily conversation so well acquainted with 
twelve of the great heroes of antiquity, they may have known 
even more than twelve. It is a rare historical name that sur- 
vives without a single other name or event of some sort at- 
tached to it. If Charlemagne’s name came down in general 
tradition, as Bédier himself thus implies, it came with certain 
elements of romantic nature attached to it, brave deeds, no 
doubt, and the stories of the men who fought for him, or of 


13 Cf. also Huet, Moyen Age, 1913, p. 428; and ibid., p. 429, relative 
to the Provencal Boéce. 


IIO 


CONCLUSION 


those who dared to oppose him. And if this much could be 
transmitted—and Bédier does not deny it—without the aid of 
the monks, is it necessary that the jongleurs should have 
awaited the call of the church to sing their profane legends? 
And did the clerics also furnish, already perfected, the artistic 
style and distinctive phraseology of the chansons? “Die Ent- 
stehung der Chansons de geste hat B. nicht erklart; das gibt er 
selbst ausdrtcklich zu.” Such is Tavernier’s opinion.’ Bédier 
himself admits that the mass of facts he has brought together 
“ne sauraient suffire a expliquer la formation des chansons de 
geste :*° ce n’en est pas non plus la formation qu’ils prétendent 
expliquer, c’en est seulement 1’élément historique.” And 
“Vhistoire tient peu de place” in these poems. It is possible to 
agree with Beédier entirely here; it has been repeatedly em- 
phasized in this study that the poems do not concern them- 
selves with historical events. One may even say with Bédier 
(IV, 399-400) “N’est-il pas remarquable que, dans tout le 
vaste cycle des Lorrains, 4 part de Charles Martel, Pépin, et 
quelques acteurs d’arriére-plan, comme Helois, il n’y ait pas un 
seul personnage historique?’ It is remarkable that the poet, 
having waited until the year 1100 to receive historical data 
from the churches, finally writes his vast work, as Bédier him- 
self admits, without showing the slightest results of this inter- 
course with the monks! It is a fact well worthy of note that 
Bédier finds no support for his hypothesis in the poem of 
- Garin le Loherain—for the author of this poem had a knowl- 
edge of geography that surpasses anything to be found in any 
other production of the whole body of the epic poetry. Bédier, 
however, finds no church influence in the geographical details, 
nor, for that matter, in any phase of this poem. It is a perti- 
nent comment on Bédier’s hypothesis that his strongest reliance 
is in poems obviously of late romantic origin, which have no 
pretense to geographical exactness. It might be expected that 
Bédier would find a wealth of material in a poem so rich in 
details of place-names as the Garin: on the contrary he finds 
14 Tavernier, supra, p. 210. 
15 TV, 428. 
III 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


a stumbling block that is to be avoided rather than removed or 
utilized. Bédier is right: his researches explain little, almost 
not at all, the formation of the chanson de geste. What he 
has done—it may be repeated—is first of all a valuable nega- 
tive work—he has cleared the field of theories further from 
the truth than his own. On the positive side he has been 
limited to showing a connection between the pilgrimages and 
certain of the chansons de geste.*® 


III 

If the sum total of our knowledge of the origin and age of 
the chansons de geste were to be expressed in a few sentences, 
the statement would be somewhat as follows. 

Up to the present time, much of the work on the epic 
poetry has been vitiated by the partisan effort to assign the 
poetry to either French or German sources. On the Germanic 
side, there has been established with a high degree of proba- 
bility the connection of the epic material with historic events 
as early as the seventh century, thus implying an unbroken 
tradition from the early German poetry of the Frankish in- 
vaders, and earlier. On the French side the effort has been to 
explain how the poetry may be considered purely French in 
origin. Finally Bédier shows a close connection of some of the 
poetry with political and social conditions of the twelfth cen- 
tury, and offers this period as the epoch of the origin of all the 
chansons de geste; although he himself says once (II, 293) 
that the oldest chansons de geste might go back to the tenth 
century, and thus unwittingly endangers his whole structure, 
and admits its weakness, depending as it does upon the truth 
of each basic element, and like a chain being only as strong as | 
its weakest link. 

This question, however, has been clouded by calling it the 
matter of origin. For before anything can be said of origin, 
the age must be determined. Now the analogy with historical 
events establishes nothing but that the poetry was composed 

16 Cf. G. Huet, Moyen Age, 1913, 427-8: the jongleurs have simply 


adapted to the demands of a new public—the pilgrims—a sort of poetry 
already existing, and which had quite different origins. 


Li 


CONCLUSION 


subsequently to the period of the fact. On the other hand, 
Bédier proves merely what had been already known, namely, 
that a part of the poetry was composed in the twelfth century. 
Even his theory of the monkish origin is nothing new, except 
for the scope of his treatment of a subject in which he had 
been preceded by two other scholars.1” 

The present study has evidenced the fact that the only un- 
deniable, incontrovertible data on the age of the older epic 
poetry are to be found in the age of the social and political in- 
stitutions and customs unconsciously reflected in that poetry 
by its composer. The evidence of this study is to the end that 
the earliest age to which any of the poetry can be assigned 
by reason of such internal data is the ninth century: that from 
that time on there was an unbroken tradition, which spread 
with greatest rapidity and in greatest extent at the height of 
the pilgrimage movement in the twelfth century, and died out 
in the first half of the thirteenth century.1® And these ob- 
servations, limited as they must be by the scope of this study, 
point the way to a further analysis, less startling in its con- 
clusions than Bédier’s epoch-making hypothesis, but at the 
same time a richer field for reliable data on the age of the epic 
material—that is, in the customs, and social and political in- 
stitutions, reflected in the poems, and proper to successive cen- 
turies respectively of the history of France in the early middle 
ages. 

17 Cf, C. Jullian, Histoire de Bordeaux, 1805, p. 118: qui sait si les 
pélerins n’ont pas été les artisans principaux de ces légendes, les ‘vrais 
rhapsodes de ces épopées, les attachant, pour ainsi dire, le long de la 
voie quils parcouraient, aux sanctuaires ov ils s'arrétaient? And P. A. 
Becker, Grundriss der altfranzdsischen Literatur, Heidelberg, 1907, I, pp. 
31-36, says the poems depend upon facts and names retained by the 
historians (i.e., the Church) ; that the poets securing these data, com- 
posed their songs along the pilgrimage routes, and recited the primitive 


legends at the fairs. Becker’s departure from the old theory was as 


early as 1808. 

18 Cf, P. Meyer, Recherches sur l’épopée francaise, Paris, 1867, p. 65. 
Cf. also F. Lot, Romania, XLII, 1913, p. 597: On atténuera sans doute 
... Uinfluence directe du clergé dans la formation des épopées: les 
tombes et autres monuments figurés ont donné le branle a@ limagination 
des poétes, la société a inspiré Pesprit qui les anime ... sans quwl soit 
nécessaire d'admetire que ces euvres soient dues a de véritables clérics. 


Lie 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


The following list is limited to those works that have been 
of especial value in the course of this investigation. 


I 
TEXTS 


Aiol, J. Normand and G. Raynaud, Paris, 1877. 

Aliscans, E. Wienbeck, W. Hartnacke, P. Rasch, Halle, 1903. 

Amis et Amiles, K. Hoffmann, Erlangen, 1882. 

Aubert le Bourgoing, P. Tarbé, Reims, 1849. Muittheilungen 
aus altfranzosischen. Handschriften, von A. Tobler. I. Aus 
der Chanson de geste von Auberi, nach einer vaticanischen 
Handschrift. Leipzig, 1870. 

Aye d Avignon, F. Guessard and P. Meyer, Paris, 1861. 

Chevalerie Ogier de Danemarche, J. Barrois, Paris, 1842. 

Couronnement de Louis, E. Langlois, Paris, 1888. 

Fierabras, A. Kroeber and G. Servois, Paris, 1860. 

Floovant, F. Guessard and H. Michelant, Paris, 1859. 

Garin le Loherain, P. Paris, Paris, 1833-1835. 

Gaydon, F. Guessard and S. Luce, Paris, 1862. 

Gérard de Rossillon, Francisque-Michel, Paris, 1856. 

Anfang der Chanson de Girbert de Metz, E. Stengel (Roma- 
nische Studien, I, pp. 441 ff., E. Boehmer, Strassburg, 1875.) 

Die Befreiung Narbonne’s durch Gerbert de Més, Episode aus 
dem Schlussteil der Chanson de Gerbert de Més, E. Sten- 
gel (Zeitschnft fiir franzosische Sprache und Litteratur, 
XXIII, 1901, pp. 271-301). 

Gormont et Isembart, A. Bayot, Paris, 1914. 

Fragment de Gormund et Isembard, R. Heiligbrodt (Roma- 
nische Studien, III, 1878, pp. 501-596). 

Gui de Bourgogne, F. Guessard and H. Michelant, Paris, 1859. 

Gui de Nanteuil, P. Meyer, Paris, 1861. 

Hervis de Metz, E. Stengel (Gesellschaft fiir romanische Lit- 
eratur, I, Dresden, 1903). 

Hugues Capet, De la Grange, Paris, 1864. 

Mort de Garin le Loherain, E. du Méril, Paris, 1846. 

Otinel, F. Guessard and H. Michelant, Paris, 1859. 


114 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Quatre Fils Aymon, F. Castets, Montpellier, 1909. 

Raoul de Cambrai, P. Meyer and A. Longnon, Paris, 1882. 

Renaut de Montauban, H. Michelant (Bibliothek des Iitte- 
rarischen Vereins in Stuttgart, LX VII, Stuttgart, 1862. 


I] 


DETRRARY CREICISM: 


Les Archaismes apparents dans la chanson de Raoul de Cam- 

bra, Acher (Revue des langues romanes, L, 1907, pp. 
Bytes) 

De Floovante, A. Darmesteter, Paris, 1877. 

Erde und Gras als Rechtssymbol im Raoul de Cambrai, F. Set- 
tegast (Zeitschrifi fiir romanische Phulologie, XX XI, 1907, 
pp. 588 ff.). 

Floovant-Studien, G. Brockstedt, Kiel, 1907. 

Die Formalititen des gottesgerichtlichen Zweikampfs im der 
altfranzosischen Epik, M. Pfeffer (Zeitschrift fiir roma- 
nische Philologie, 1X, 1885, pp. 1-74). 

France, Franceis, und Franc im Rolandsliede, C. T. Hoefft, 
Strassburg, 1891. 

Geschichte der franzosichen Litteratur, Suchier and Birch- 
Hirschfeld, Leipzig and Vienna, 1goo. 

Gormund et Isembard, F. Lot (Romania, XXVIP, 1808, pp. 

pir. O). 

Grundriss der altfranzdsischen Literatur, P. A. Becker, Heidel- 
berg, 1907. 

Histoire littéraire de la France, ouvrage commencé par des 
religieux bénédictins, Paris, 1733 ff. 

Histoire poétique de Charlemagne, G. Paris, Paris, 1865 (and 
1905). 

Histoire de Bordeaux jusqwen 1895, C. Jullian, Bordeaux, 
1895. 

Lidée politique dans les chansons de geste, L. Gautier (Revue 
des questions historiques, VII, 1869, pp. 79 ff.). 

Les Légendes épiques, J. Bédier, Paris, 1908-13; 2d. ed., I, 
IQT4. 

Le Origini dell’ epopea francese, P. Rajna, Firenze, 1884. 

Recherches sur lépopée francaise, P. Meyer, Paris, 1867. 

Vita e Poesie di Sordello di Goito, C. de Lollis, Halle, 1896. 

* x 2 2 * 


Reviews of the Légendes épiques of Bédier as follows: 
W. Tavernier, Archiv fiir das Studium der neueren Sprachen 
und Literaturen, CXXXI, 1913, pp. 734 ff. 


II5 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


W. Foerster, Literarisches Centralblatt fiir Deutschland, 1908, 
27 Juni. 

G. Huet, Moyen Age, 1908, pp. 339 ff.; 1913, pp. 427 ff. 

E, Bourciez, Revue critique, LX VII, 1909, pp. 71 ff. 

F., Lot, Romania, XLII, 1913, pp. 593 ff. 

rt Suchier, Zeitschrift fiir romanische Philologie, XXXII, 


1908, pp. 734 ff. 


III 
HISTORICAL SOURCES AND STUDIES. 


Atlas historique de la France depuis César jusqua nos jours, 
A. Longnon, Paris, 1912. 

Blood Covenant, H. C. Trumbull, Philadelphia, 1808. 

Burchardi et Cuonradi Urspergensium Chronicon, Pertz, Han- 
nover, 1874. 

Capitularia regum Francorum, Baluzius, Parisiis, 1677. 

Chronica Albrict Monachi Trium Fontium (Monumenta Ger- 
maniae Historica, Scriptores, XXIII, 1874, pp. 631 ff.). 

Chronique rimée de Philippe Mouskes, De Reiffenberg, Bru- 
xelles, 1836-8. 

Sh Sb hied de Froissart, Kervyn de Lettenhove, Bruxelles, 
1007-77. 

Clovis et la Société franque d’aprés la loi salique, C. Bayet 
(Histoire de France, E. Lavisse, II, partie I, chap. II, Paris, 
IQOT). 

De la Conqueste de Constantinoble par Geoffroi de Ville- 
hardouin et Henri de Valenciennes, P. Paris, Paris, 1838. 
Conquéte de Constantinople, Villehardouin, N. de Wailly, 

Paris, 1900. 

Coutumes du Beauvoisis, Beaumanoir, Beugnot, Paris, 1842. 

The Dark Ages, C. Oman, London, 1914. 

Das hofische Leben zur Zeit der Minnesinger, A. Schultz, 2d. 
ed., Leipzig, 1889-90. 

De lEsprit des lois, Montesquieu (CEuvres complétes de Mon- 
tesquieu, Parelle, Paris, 1877). 

Deutsche Rechtsalterthiimer, J. L. K. Grimm, 4th ed., Leipzig, 
1899. 

Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte, H. Brunner, LetpHe 1892; 2d ed., 
I, 1906. 

East and West through Fifteen Centuries, G. F. Young, Lon- 
don and New York, 1916. 

Ex Chronico Ademari Cabannensis (Recueil des historiens des 
Gaules et de la France, VIII, pp. 232 ff., Paris, 1871). 


116 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Forum Judicum, pub. by The Royal Spanish Academy, Madrid, 
1815. 

La France et les Francs dans la langue politique du moyen 
dge, G. Kurth (Revue des questions Istoriques, LVII, 

Kyte 

Gaul under the Merovingian Franks. Institutions. C. Pfister 
(Cambridge Medieval History, H. M. Gwatkin and J. P. 

_ Whitney, II, chap. v, New York, 1913). 

Germania, Tacitus, C. Halm, Leipzig, 1886. 

Historical Geography of Europe, E. A. Freeman (ed. J. B. 
Bury), 3d. ed., London, New York, Bombay, 1903. 

Lex Salica mit der Mallobergischen Glosse nach den Hand- 
schriften von Besancon-Sanct-Gallen 731 und Johannes 
Herold, A. Holder, Leipzig, 1880. 

Libri Quinque, Raoul Glaber (Migne, Patrologia Latina, 

hae tL 600. 1 Parispceoo: 

Magna Bibliotheca Veterum Patrum, La Bigne, Paris, 1646. 
Le Monde germanique ala fin du IV* siécle, C. Bayet (Histoire 
de France, Il, partie I, chap. 1, E. Lavisse, Paris, 1901). 
Les Origines de lancienne France, J. Flach, Paris, 1886-1904. 
Quelques mots sur Torigine des Pairs de France, F. Lot 

(Revue historique, LIV, pp. 34 ff., 1894). 
Recherches de la France, E. Pasquier, Paris, 1723. 
Recueil des Formules du V’ au X° siécle, E. de Roziére, Paris, 
1859. 

Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, Bouquet 
(Nouvelle édition de L. Delisle, Paris, 1869-80, 19 volumes). 

Régime féodal, Seignobos (Histoire de la France, Il, partie 
Lipid. Paris,: 1901): 

Le Royaume d’Arles et de Vienne, Fournier, Paris, 1891. 

~ Les Sports et Jeux @exercice dans lancienne France, J. J. 
Jusserand, Paris, 1go!. 

Glossarium mediae et infimae latimtatis cum supplimentis D. 
P. Carpenterit, DuCange, L. Favre, Niort, 1883-86. 

Golden Bough, III, Taboo and the Perils of the Soul, J. G. 
Frazer, 3d. ed., London, 1914. 

L’Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal, P. Meyer, Paris, 1891. 

Histoire des institutions politiques de Vancienne France, Il, 
L’invasion germanique et la fin de lempire, Fustel de Cou- 
langes, Paris, 1891. 

Etude sur ladministration féodale dans le Languedoc, Molinier 
(Histoire générale de Languedoc, Devic and Vaissete, VII, 
pp. 132 ff., Toulouse, 1879). 

Historia ecclesiastica, Ordericus Vitalis, Le Prevost, Paris, 
1838-55. 

117 


FEUDAL FRANCE IN THE FRENCH EPIC 


Western Europe im the Fifth Century, E. A. Freeman, Lon- 
don and New Yoark, 1904. 

Wiponis Vita Chuonradi Imperatoris (Monumenta Germaniae 
Historica, Scriptores, XI, pp. 254 ff.). 


VITA 


Born June 2, 1893, at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, I received 
my secondary education at Shady Side Academy, Pittsburgh. 
In 1912 I entered Princeton University, and was graduated in 
1916 with the degree of A.B. and High Final Special Honors 
in Modern Languages, Romanic Division. In 1917 I received 
the degree of A.M. from Princeton University. The year 
1917-1918 has been spent at Columbia University. 

I wish to express my appreciation of courses pursued under 
Professors Todd, Baldensperger, Loiseaux, Spiers, Brander 
Matthews, Evans. Especially I owe to Dr. Todd thanks for 
his most valuable assistance in the present study. 

GerorGE BAER FUNDENBURG. 


118 


INDEX 


Aiol, chanson of the first decade of the thirteenth century, 22, 103, 
representing the late feudal period, 100, political geography of this 
poem, 27-28, desfiance in this poem, gI. 

Amis et Amiles, chanson of the twelfth century, 8, its unreliability 
as source of French custom-material, 8-9, compagnonnage in the 
Amis et Amiles, 67, 81, traditional friendship of Amis and Amiles, 
67. . 

Anseis de Metz, chanson of the eleventh century, 26, 100, 102, geog- 
raphy of poem in bearing upon place of origin, 26-27. 

Antrustions, vassals of the early Frankish princes, 53-57. 

- Arles, Kingdom of, constituted in 880, received name of Arles in 
twelfth century from its capital city, 18. 

Auberi le Bourgoing, chanson of the tenth century, 24, 100, 102, fi- 
delity of depiction of feudal life, 9, political geography of, 19-20, 
24-26, cowardice of baron in face of superior strength illustrated 
by this poem, 42, one of the first chansons read by the author, 9. 

Aye d’Avignon, chanson of second quarter of twelfth century, 22, 
100, 103, political geography of, 22, 27-28, duel portrayed, 94-98. 

Barons, bravery of, 34, reliance on superior strength, 34, 85-87, inde- 
pendence of, 35, restive spirit of, 36-37, savagery of, 38-40, coward- 
ice in the face of physical superiority, 42-43, political status of, 
47-51, 79-84. 

Benefices, origin of, 55-57. 

Beuves d’Aigremont, chanson of the ninth century, 17, 100, 102, incor- 
porated as first episode of Quatre Fils Aymon, 17, political geog- 
raphy, 24-26. 

Bourgogne, Kingdom of, known as Kingdom of Arles after twelfth 
century, 18. 

Cantilénes, short songs supposed by Gaston Paris and others to have 
been source of chansons de geste, 1, 103. 


Chivalry, subsequent to Feudalism, 4, contrasted with Feudalism, 50. 


Cligés, type poem of the Court Epic, composed about 1170 by Chrétien 
de Troyes, 2. 


Commendation, a social institution under the Merovingians, 58-61. 


Compagnonnage, a supposititious relationship of man to man in the 
Feudal epoch, 67, note 39, 79-84. 


Congié, formal leave-taking, significance of the omission of, 96. 
Consanguinity, a political instrument, 37. 


Couronnement de Louis, chanson of the ninth century, 16-17, 100, 102, 
its exaltation of the Imperial Ideal, 2, political geography of, 16- 
17, 24-26, homme-d-seigneur relationship in this poem, 67-60. 


II9Q 


INDEX 


Court Epic, most recent form of epic poetry, 2, dating from the end 
of the twelfth century, 4. 


Cowardice, cf. Barons, and Auberi le Bourgoing. 


Crusades, influence on epic poetry, 4. 

Desfiance, the breaking of friendly relations between man and man, 
49, 80-94, omission from a chanson an indication of early compo- 
sition, 92. 

Duel, the arbiter of justice, 94-99, historical instance of, 93. 

Epic Poetry, classification of, 3-8, 100-101, nature of, I, 33, 42, 51, age 
of, 3-8, 100-103, I12-I13. 

Festuca, symbol of the breaking of allegiance between homme and 
seigneur, 88-89. 

Feudal Epic, nature of, 3-4, accuracy of, 13-14, political geography of, 
19-22, age of, 3-8, 19-22, IOI. 

Feudalism, nature of, 3, 78-79, 98, contrasted with Chivalry, 5o. 

Fideles, vassals of Frankish princes, 53-54: ci. Antrustions 

Fiefs, origin of, 61. 

Floovant, poem of the ninth century, 16, 64-67, 100, 102, political 
geography of, 24-26, portrayal of homme-d-seigneur relationship, 
64-67. 

France, extent of, during the early Middle Ages, 12-15. 

Fréres d’Armes, value of the term in its relation to compagnonnage, 84. 

Gaige, incidental to duel, 93. 

Garin le Loherain, chanson of the eleventh century, 3, 100, 102, reliabil- 
ity in depiction of custom-material and geographical details, 9, 
20-21, 26-27, 29, primitive anger scenes in, 37-38, portrayal of the 
bond of kinship in, 48-50. 

Gaydon, chanson of the last quarter of twelfth century, 22, 100, 103, 
desfiance in, 91, duel in, 95-96. 

Gérard de Rossillon, chanson of the last half of the twelfth century, 
22, 100, 103, political geography of, 22, 27-28. 

Gerbert de Metz, chanson of eleventh century, 20, 100, 103, political 
geography of, 26-27. 

Gormund et Isembard, chanson of the ninth century, 100, 102, political 
geography of, 24-26, homme-d-seigneur relationship in, 69-70. 
Guillaume le Maréchal, historical value of, 31, characteristic anger 

display in, 39. 

Guy de Bourgogne, chanson of the twelfth century, 22, 100, 103, un- 
reliability of, 13, 29, political geography of, 22, 28. 

Guy de Nanteuil, chanson of the end of twelfth century, 22, 100, 103, 
political geography of, 28. 

Hervis de Metz, chanson of early thirteenth century, 22, 100, 103, un- 
reliability of, 13, 22, 20. 

Homage, outgrowth of commendation, 61, formula for, 61-62. 

Homme-a-seigneur relationship, historical development of, 52-62, po- 
etical illustrations of, 64-77, contrasted with supposititious system 
of compagnonnage, 79-82, disappearance of, 85. 

Honor, medieval connotation of term, 43-44. 


120 


INDEX 


Kinship, political value of, 47-51. 

Mort Garin, chanson of eleventh century, 20, 100, 102, accuracy of, 
20-21, 29, political geography of, 20-21, 26-27, primitive nature of, 
37, bond of kinship in, 49. 

National Epic, Roland sole example of, 2, historical inaccuracy of, IoI. 

Ogier, chanson of the last quarter of the twelfth century, 22, 100, 103, 
political geography of, 22, 27-20. 

Origin of epic poetry, place of, 25-29, date of, 100-103. 

' Otinel, chanson of last quarter of twelfth century, 22, 100, 103, politi- 
cal geography of, 22, 28-209. 

Patrocinium, the Roman counterpart of the Frankish Commendation, 
58. 

Pilgrimages, influence on epic poetry, 6, 104-112. 

Pre-Feudal Epic, chansons of the late ninth and early tenth centuries, 3. 


Quatre Fils Aymon, chanson of the twelfth century, 22, 27, 100, 103, 
artificially connected with the Beuves d’Aigremont, 17, political 
geography of, 22-23, 27-209. 

Raoul de Cambrai, chanson of the tenth century, 19, 24, 77, 100, 103, 
political geography of, 24-26, 29, superstition in, 46-47, homme-a- 
seigneur relationship in, 72-77, one of the first chansons de geste 
read by the author, 9. 


Religion, formality of, 45-47, influence of, 87. 

Revenge, dominant characteristic of medieval epoch, 70-71, 76, 93. 

Sea sole example of National Epic, 1-2, geographical inaccuracy 
Of,013: 

Romances of Chivalry, dating from end of twelfth century, 4. 

Romans d’aventure, applied to late feudal poetry, 4, inaccuracy of, IoI. 

Saddle-bearing an ancient form of amend, 64, note 28. 

Superstition, phase of medieval religion, 45-47. 

Terre ne erbe, formula of primitive oath, 63, note 28. 

Wergild, murder indemnity, 54. 


121 


eh 
t 


Re 


i 
Pe 


0 A 
3 0112 128839054 


